A Short Course on Operator Semigroups (Universitext)

Universitext Editorial Board (North America): S. Axler K.A. Ribet Universitext Editors (North America): S. Axler and ...

Author: Klaus-Jochen Engel | Rainer Nagel

18 downloads 1083 Views 2MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Universitext Editorial Board (North America):

S. Axler K.A. Ribet

Universitext Editors (North America): S. Axler and K.A. Ribet Aguilar/Gitler/Prieto: Algebraic Topology from a Homotopical Viewpoint Aksoy/Khamsi: Nonstandard Methods in Fixed Point Theory Andersson: Topics in Complex Analysis Aupetit: A Primer on Spectral Theory Bachman/Narici/Beckenstein: Fourier and Wavelet Analysis Badescu: Algebraic Surfaces Balakrishnan/Ranganathan: A Textbook of Graph Theory Balser: Formal Power Series and Linear Systems of Meromorphic Ordinary Differential Equations Bapat: Linear Algebra and Linear Models (2nd ed.) Berberian: Fundamentals of Real Analysis Blyth: Lattices and Ordered Algebraic Structures Boltyanskii/Efremovich: Intuitive Combinatorial Topology. (Shenitzer, trans.) Booss/Bleecker: Topology and Analysis Borkar: Probability Theory: An Advanced Course Böttcher/Silbermann: Introduction to Large Truncated Toeplitz Matrices Carleson/Gamelin: Complex Dynamics Cecil: Lie Sphere Geometry: With Applications to Submanifolds Chae: Lebesgue Integration (2nd ed.) Charlap: Bieberbach Groups and Flat Manifolds Chern: Complex Manifolds Without Potential Theory Cohn: A Classical Invitation to Algebraic Numbers and Class Fields Curtis: Abstract Linear Algebra Curtis: Matrix Groups Debarre: Higher-Dimensional Algebraic Geometry Deitmar: A First Course in Harmonic Analysis (2nd ed.) DiBenedetto: Degenerate Parabolic Equations Dimca: Singularities and Topology of Hypersurfaces Edwards: A Formal Background to Mathematics I a/b Edwards: A Formal Background to Mathematics II a/b Engel/Nagel: A Short Course on Operator Semigroups Farenick: Algebras of Linear Transformations Foulds: Graph Theory Applications Friedman: Algebraic Surfaces and Holomorphic Vector Bundles Fuhrmann: A Polynomial Approach to Linear Algebra Gardiner: A First Course in Group Theory Gårding/Tambour: Algebra for Computer Science Goldblatt: Orthogonality and Spacetime Geometry Gustafson/Rao: Numerical Range: The Field of Values of Linear Operators and Matrices Hahn: Quadratic Algebras, Clifford Algebras, and Arithmetic Witt Groups Heinonen: Lectures on Analysis on Metric Spaces Holmgren: A First Course in Discrete Dynamical Systems Howe/Tan: Non-Abelian Harmonic Analysis: Applications of SL (2, R) Howes: Modern Analysis and Topology Hsieh/Sibuya: Basic Theory of Ordinary Differential Equations Humi/Miller: Second Course in Ordinary Differential Equations Hurwitz/Kritikos: Lectures on Number Theory (continued after index)

Klaus-Jochen Engel Rainer Nagel

A Short Course on Operator Semigroups

Klaus-Jochen Engel Faculty of Engineering Division of Mathematics Piazzale E. Pontieri, 2 I-67040 Monteluco di Roio (AQ) Italy

Rainer Nagel Mathematics Institute Tübingen University Auf der Morgenstelle 10 D-72076 Tübingen Germany

Editorial Board (North America): S. Axler Mathematics Department San Francisco State University San Francisco, CA 94132 USA [email protected]

K.A Ribet Mathematics Department University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA 94720-3840 USA [email protected]

Mathematics Subject Classification (2000): 47Dxx Library of Congress Control Number: 2006921439 ISBN-10: 0-387-31341-9 ISBN-13: 978-0387-31341-2 Printed on acid-free paper. ©2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. All rights reserved. This work may not be translated or copied in whole or in part without the written permission of the publisher (Springer Science+Business Media, LLC., 233 Spring Street, New York, NY 10013, USA), except for brief excerpts in connection with reviews or scholarly analysis. Use in connection with any form of information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden. The use in this publication of trade names, trademarks, service marks, and similar terms, even if they are not identified as such, is not to be taken as an expression of opinion as to whether or not they are subject to proprietary rights. Printed in the United States of America. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 springer.com

Preface

The theory of strongly continuous semigroups of linear operators on Banach spaces, operator semigroups for short, has become an indispensable tool in a great number of areas of modern mathematical analysis. In our Springer Graduate Text [EN00] we presented this beautiful theory, together with many applications, and tried to show the progress made since the publication in 1957 of the now classical monograph [HP57] by E. Hille and R. Phillips. However, the wealth of results exhibited in our Graduate Text seems to have discouraged some of the potentially interested readers. With the present text we offer a streamlined version that strictly sticks to the essentials. We have skipped certain parts, avoided the use of sophisticated arguments, and, occasionally, weakened the formulation of results and modified the proofs. However, to a large extent this book consists of excerpts taken from our Graduate Text, with some new material on positive semigroups added in Chapter VI. We hope that the present text will help students take their first step into this interesting and lively research field. On the other side, it should provide useful tools for the working mathematician. Acknowledgments This book is dedicated to our students. Without them we would not be able to do and to enjoy mathematics. Many of them read previous versions when it served as the text of our Seventh Internet Seminar 2003/04. Here Genni Fragnelli, Marc Preunkert and Mark C. Veraar were among the most active readers. Particular thanks go to Tanja Eisner, Vera Keicher, Agnes Radl for proposing considerable improvements in the final version. How much we owe to our colleague and friend Ulf Schlotterbeck cannot be seen from the pages of this book. Klaus-Jochen Engel Rainer Nagel October 2005 v

To Our Students

Contents

Preface .........................................................................

v

Introduction ........................................................... 1. Strongly Continuous Semigroups .................................. a. Basic Properties ................................................... b. Standard Constructions ......................................... 2. Examples .............................................................. a. Finite-Dimensional Systems: Matrix Semigroups ............ b. Uniformly Continuous Operator Semigroups ................ 3. More Semigroups .................................................... a. Multiplication Semigroups on C0 (Ω) .......................... b. Multiplication Semigroups on Lp (Ω, µ) ....................... c. Translation Semigroups ..........................................

1 2 2 8 11 11 17 19 20 26 30

II. Semigroups, Generators, and Resolvents ..................... 1. Generators of Semigroups and Their Resolvents ............... 2. Examples Revisited .................................................. a. Standard Constructions ......................................... b. Standard Examples .............................................. c. Sobolev Towers .................................................... 3. Generation Theorems ............................................... a. Hille–Yosida Theorems ........................................... b. The Lumer–Phillips Theorem .................................. c. More Examples ....................................................

34 35 46 46 50 57 63 63 74 83

I.

ix

x

Contents

4. Analytic Semigroups ................................................ 90 5. Further Regularity Properties of Semigroups ................... 104 6. Well-Posedness for Evolution Equations ......................... 110 III. Perturbation of Semigroups ...................................... 115 1. Bounded Perturbations ............................................. 115 2. Perturbations of Contractive and Analytic Semigroups ....... 124 IV. Approximation of Semigroups ................................... 136 1. Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorems ......................... 136 a. A Technical Tool: Pseudoresolvents ........................... 138 b. The Approximation Theorems ................................. 141 c. Examples ........................................................... 145 2. The Chernoff Product Formula .................................... 148 V.

Spectral Theory and Asymptotics for Semigroups ........ 156 1. Spectrum of Semigroups and Generators ........................ 157 a. Spectral Theory for Closed Operators ........................ 157 b. Spectral Theory for Generators ................................ 168 2. Spectral Mapping Theorems ....................................... 176 a. Examples and Counterexamples ................................ 176 b. Spectral Mapping Theorems for Semigroups ................. 179 3. Stability and Hyperbolicity of Semigroups ...................... 185 a. Stability Concepts ................................................ 186 b. Characterization of Uniform Exponential Stability ......... 188 c. Hyperbolic Decompositions ..................................... 191 4. Convergence to Equilibrium ....................................... 194

VI. Positive Semigroups ................................................ 205 1. Basic Properties ...................................................... 205 2. Spectral Theory for Positive Semigroups ........................ 207 3. Convergence to Equilibrium, Revisited ........................... 211 4. Semigroups for Age-Dependent Population Equations ........ 216 Appendix A. A Reminder of Some Functional Analysis and Operator Theory ................................................ 222 References ..................................................................... 231 Selected References to Recent Research ............................ 237 List of Symbols and Abbreviations ................................... 240 Index ............................................................................ 243

Chapter I Introduction

Generally speaking, a dynamical system is a family T (t) t≥0 of mappings on a set X satisfying T (t + s) = T (t)T (s) for all t, s ≥ 0, T (0) = id. Here X is viewed as the set of all states of a system, t ∈ R+ := [0, ∞) as time and T (t) as the map describing the change of a state x ∈ X at time 0 into the state T (t)x at time t. In the linear context, the state space X is a vector space, each T (t) is a linear operator on X, and T (t) t≥0 is called a (one-parameter) operator semigroup. The standard situation in which such operator semigroups naturally appear are so-called Abstract Cauchy Problems u(t) ˙ = Au(t) for t ≥ 0, (ACP) u(0) = x, where A is a linear operator on a Banach space X. Here, the problem consists in finding a differentiable function u on R+ such that (ACP) holds. If for each initial value x ∈ X a unique solution u(·, x) exists, then T (t)x := u(t, x), t ≥ 0, x ∈ X, defines an operator semigroup. For the “working mathematician,” (ACP) is the problem, and T (t) t≥0 the solution to be found. The opposite point of view also sense: given an operator semigroup (i.e., a dynamical makes system) T (t) t≥0 , under what conditions can it be “described” by a differential equation (ACP), and how can the operator A be found? 1

2

Chapter I. Introduction

In some simple and concrete situations (see Section 2 below) the relation between T (t) t≥0 and A is given by the formulas T (t) = etA

and

A=

d dt T (t)|t=0 .

In general, a comparably simple relation seems to be out of reach. However, miraculously as it may seem, a simple continuity assumption on the semigroup (see Definition 1.1) produces, in the usual Banach space setting, a rich and beautiful theory with a broad and almost universal field of applications. It is the aim of this course to develop this theory.

1. Strongly Continuous Semigroups The following is our basic definition. 1.1 Definition. A family T (t) t≥0 of bounded linear operators on a Banach space X is called a strongly continuous (one-parameter) semigroup (or C0 -semigroup 1 ) if it satisfies the functional equation T (t + s) = T (t)T (s) for all t, s ≥ 0, (FE) T (0) = I and is strongly continuous in the following sense. For every x ∈ X the orbit maps (SC)

ξx : t → ξx (t) := T (t)x

are continuous from R+ into X for every x ∈ X. The property (SC) can also be expressed by saying that the map t → T (t) is continuous from R+ into the space Ls (X) of all bounded operators on X endowed with the strong operator topology (see Appendix A, (A.2)). Finally, if these properties hold for R instead of R+ , we call T (t) t∈R a strongly continuous (one-parameter) group (or C0 -group) on X.

a. Basic Properties Our first goal is to facilitate the verification of the strong continuity (SC) required in Definition 1.1. This is possible thanks to the uniform boundedness principle, which implies the following frequently used equivalence. (See also Exercise 1.8.(1) and the more abstract version in Proposition A.3.) 1 Although we prefer the terminology “strongly continuous,” we point out that the symbol C0 abbreviates “Ces` aro summable of order 0.”

Section 1. Strongly Continuous Semigroups

3

1.2 Lemma. Let X be a Banach space and let F be a function from a compact set K ⊂ R into L(X). Then the following assertions are equivalent. (a) F is continuous for the strong operator topology; i.e., the mappings K t → F (t)x ∈ X are continuous for every x ∈ X. (b) F is uniformly bounded on K, and the mappings K t → F (t)x ∈ X are continuous for all x in some dense subset D of X. (c) F is continuous for the topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets of X; i.e., the map K × C (t, x) → F (t)x ∈ X is uniformly continuous for every compact set C in X. Proof. The implication (c) ⇒ (a) is trivial, whereas (a) ⇒ (b) follows from the uniform boundedness principle, because the mappings t → F (t)x are continuous, hence bounded, on the compact set K. To show (b) ⇒ (c), we assume F (t) ≤ M for all t ∈ K and fix some ε > 0 and a compact set C in X. Then there exist finitely many x1 , . . . , xm ∈ D m such that C ⊂ i=1 (xi + ε/M U ), where U denotes the unit ball of X. Now choose δ > 0 such that F (t)xi − F (s)xi ≤ ε for all i = 1, . . . , m, and for all t, s ∈ K, such that |t − s| ≤ δ. For arbitrary x, y ∈ C and t, s ∈ K with x − y ≤ ε/M |t − s| ≤ δ, this yields F (t)x − F (s)y ≤ F (t)(x − xj ) + F (t) − F (s) xj + F (s)(xj − x) + F (s)(x − y) ≤ 4 ε, where we choose j ∈ {1, . . . , m} such that x − xj ≤ ε/M . This estimate proves that (t, x) → F (t)x is uniformly continuous with respect to t ∈ K and x ∈ C. As an easy consequence of this lemma, in combination with the functional equation (FE), we obtain that the continuity of the orbit maps ξx : t → T (t)x at each t ≥ 0 and for each x ∈ X is already implied by much weaker properties. 1.3 Proposition. For a semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X, the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is strongly continuous. (b) limt↓0 T (t)x = x for all x ∈ X. (c) There exist δ > 0, M ≥ 1, and a dense subset D ⊂ X such that (i) T (t) ≤ M for all t ∈ [0, δ], (ii) limt↓0 T (t)x = x for all x ∈ D.

4


Proof. The implication (a) ⇒ (c.ii) is trivial. In order to prove that (a) ⇒ (c.i), we assume, by contradiction, that there exists a sequence (δn )n∈N ⊂ R+ converging to zero such that T (δn ) → ∞ as n → ∞. Then, by the uniform boundedness principle, there exists x ∈ X such that T (δn )x n∈N is unbounded, contradicting the fact that T (·)x is continuous at t = 0. In order to verify that (c) ⇒ (b), we put K := {tn : n ∈ N} ∪ {0} for an arbitrary sequence (tn )n∈N ⊂ [0, ∞) converging to t = 0. Then K ⊂ [0, ∞) is compact, T (·)|K is bounded, and T (·)|K x is continuous for all x ∈ D. Hence, we can apply Lemma 1.2.(b) to obtain lim T (tn )x = x

n→∞

for all x ∈ X. Because (tn )n∈N was chosen arbitrarily, this proves (b). To show that (b) ⇒ (a), let t0 > 0 and let x ∈ X. Then lim T (t0 + h)x − T (t0 )x ≤ T (t0 ) · lim T (h)x − x = 0, h↓0

h↓0

which proves right continuity. If h < 0, the estimate T (t0 + h)x − T (t0 )x ≤ T (t0 + h) · x − T (−h)x implies left continuity whenever T (t) remains uniformly bounded for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. This, however, follows as above first for some small interval [0, δ] by the uniform boundedness principle and then on each compact interval using (FE). Because in many cases the uniform boundedness of the operators T (t) for t ∈ [0, t0 ] is obvious, one obtains strong continuity by checking (right) continuity of the orbit maps ξx at t = 0 for a dense set of “nice” elements x ∈ X only. We demonstrate the advantage of this procedure in the examples discussed below (e.g., in Paragraph 3.15). We repeat that for a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 the finite orbits T (t)x : t ∈ [0, t0 ] are continuous images of a compact interval, hence compact and therefore bounded for each x ∈ X. So by the uniform boundedness principle, each strongly continuous semigroup is uniformly bounded on each compact interval, a fact that implies exponential boundedness on R+ . 1.4 Proposition. For every strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , there exist constants w ∈ R and M ≥ 1 such that (1.1) for all t ≥ 0.

T (t) ≤ M ewt


5

Proof. Choose M ≥ 1 such that T (s) ≤ M for all 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 and write t ≥ 0 as t = s + n for n ∈ N and 0 ≤ s < 1. Then T (t) ≤ T (s) · T (1) n ≤ M n+1 = M en log M ≤ M ewt holds for w := log M and each t ≥ 0.

The infimum of all exponents w for which an estimate of the form (1.1) holds for a given strongly continuous semigroup plays an important role in the sequel. We therefore reserve a name for it. 1.5 Definition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T = T (t) t≥0 , we call ω0 := ω0 (T) := inf

there exists Mw ≥ 1 such that w∈R: T (t) ≤ Mw ewt for all t ≥ 0

its growth bound (or type). Moreover, a semigroup is called bounded if we can take w = 0 in (1.1), andcontractive if w = 0 and M = 1 is possible. Finally, the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is called isometric if T (t)x = x for all t ≥ 0 and x ∈ X. It becomes clear in the discussion below, but is presently left as a challenge to the reader that • ω0 = −∞ may occur, • The infimum in (1.1) may not be attained; i.e, it might happen that no constant M exists such that T (t) ≤ M eω0 t for all t ≥ 0, and • Constants M > 1 may be necessary; i.e., no matter how large w ≥ ω0 is chosen, T (t) will not be dominated by ewt for all t ≥ 0. We close this subsection by showing that using the weak operator topology instead of the strong operator topology in Definition 1.1 will not change our class of semigroups. This is a surprising result, and its proof needs more sophisticated tools from functional analysis than we have used up to this point. So the beginner may just skip the proof. 1.6 Theorem. A semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X is strongly continuous if and only if it is weakly continuous, i.e., if the mappings R+ t → T (t)x, x ∈ C are continuous for each x ∈ X, x ∈ X .

6


Proof. We have only to show that weak implies strong continuity. As a first step, we use the principle of uniform boundedness twice to conclude that on compact intervals, T (t) t≥0 is pointwise and then uniformly bounded. Therefore (use Proposition 1.3.(c)), it suffices to show that

E := x ∈ X : lim T (t)x − x = 0 t↓0

is a (strongly) dense subspace of X. To this end, we define for x ∈ X and r > 0 a linear form xr on X by xr , x :=

1 r

r

T (s)x, x ds

for x ∈ X .

0

Then xr is bounded and hence xr ∈ X . On the other hand, the set

T (s)x : s ∈ [0, r]

is the continuous image of [0, r] in the space X endowed with the weak topology, hence is weakly compact in X. Kreˇın’s theorem (see Proposition A.1.(ii)) implies that its closed convex hull co T (s)x : s ∈ [0, r] is still weakly compact in X. Because xr is a σ(X , X )-limit of Riemann sums, it follows that xr ∈ co T (s)x : s ∈ [0, r] , whence xr ∈ X. (See also [Rud73, Thm. 3.27].) It is clear from the definition that the set D := xr : r > 0, x ∈ X is weakly dense in X. On the other hand, for xr ∈ D we obtain t+r 1 1 r T (t)xr − xr = sup T (s)x, x ds − T (s)x, x ds r 0 x ≤1 r t t

r+t 1 1 ≤ sup T (s)x, x ds + T (s)x, x ds r r r 0 x ≤1 ≤

2t x sup T (s) → 0 r 0≤s≤r+t

as t ↓ 0; i.e., D ⊂ E. We conclude that E is weakly, hence by Proposition A.1.(i) strongly, dense in X.


7

1.7 Final Comment. In the next subsection we start a relatively long discussion of elementary constructions and concrete examples. The reader impatient to see the general theory can immediately proceed to Chapter II. 1.8 Exercises. (1) Let X be a Banach space and let (Tn )n∈N be a sequence in L(X). Then the following assertions are equivalent. (a) (Tn x)n∈N converges for all x ∈ X. (b) (Tn )n∈N ⊂ L(X) is bounded and (Tn x)n∈N converges for all x in some dense subset D of X. (c) (Tn x)n∈N converges uniformly for all x ∈ C and every compact set C in X. (2) Show that the left translation semigroup Tl (t) t≥0 defined by

Tl (t)f (s) := f (s + t),

s, t ≥ 0,

is strongly continuous on each of the Banach spaces (a) C0 (R+ ) := f ∈ C(R+ ) : lims→∞ f (s) = 0 endowed with the supnorm, (b) Cub (R+ ) := f ∈ C(R+ ) : f is bounded and uniformly continuous endowed with the sup-norm, (c) C10 (R+ ) := f ∈ C1 (R+ ) : lims→∞ f (s) = lims→∞ f (s) = 0 endowed with the norm f := sups≥0 |f (s)| + sups≥0 |f (s)|. (3) Define T (t)f (s) := f (set ), s, t ≥ 0, and show that T (t) t≥0 yields strongly continuous semigroups on X∞ := C0 [1, ∞) := f ∈ C[1, ∞) : lim f (s) = 0 s→∞

and Xp := Lp [1, ∞) for 1 ≤ p < ∞. (4) Show that for a group T (t) t∈R on a Banach space X the following conditions are equivalent. (a) The group T (t) t≥0 is strongly continuous; i.e., the map R t → T (t)x ∈ X is continuous for all x ∈ X. (b) limt→t0 T (t)x = T (t0 )x for some t0 ∈ R and all x ∈ X. (c) There exist constants t0 ∈ R, δ > 0, M ≥ 0 and a dense subset D ⊂ X such that (i) T (t) ≤ M for all t ∈ [t0 , t0 + δ], (ii) limt↓t0 T (t)x = T (t0 )x for all x ∈ D. (5) Show that a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 containing an invertible operator T (t0) for some t0 > 0 can be extended to a strongly continuous group T (t) t∈R .

8


(6) On X := C[0, 1], define bounded operators T (t), t > 0, by

T (t)f (s) :=

et log s [f (s) − f (0) log s] if s ∈ (0, 1], 0 if s = 0

for f ∈ X and put T (0) := I. Prove the following assertions. (i) T (t) t≥0 is a semigroup that is strongly continuous only on (0, ∞). (ii) limt↓0 T (t) = ∞. (7) Construct a strongly continuous semigroup that is not nilpotent (hence satisfies T (t) = 0 for all t ≥ 0), but has growth bound ω0 = −∞. (Hint: 2 Consider T (t)f (s) := e−t +2st f (s− t) on the Banach space C0 (−∞, 0] = f ∈ C[−∞, 0) : lims→−∞ f (s) = 0 .)

b. Standard Constructions We now explain how one can construct in various ways new strongly continuous semigroups from a given one. This might seem trivial and/or boring, but there will be many occasions to appreciate the toolbox provided by these constructions. In any case, it is a series of instructive exercises. In the following, we always assume T = T (t) t≥0 to be a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X. 1.9 Similar Semigroups. Given another Banach space Y and an isomorphism V from Y onto X, we obtain (as in Lemma 2.4) a new strongly continuous semigroup S = S(t) t≥0 on Y by defining S(t) := V −1 T (t)V

for t ≥ 0.

Without explicit reference to the isomorphism V , we call the two semigroups T and S similar or isomorphic. Two such semigroups have the same topological properties; e.g., ω0 (T) = ω0 (S). 1.10 Rescaled Semigroups. For any numbers µ ∈ C and α > 0, we define the rescaled semigroup S(t) t≥0 by S(t) := eµt T (αt) for t ≥ 0. For example, taking µ = − ω0 (or µ < − ω0 ) and α = 1 the rescaled semigroup will have growth bound equal to (or less than) zero. This is an assumption we make without loss of generality in many situations.


9

1.11 Subspace Semigroups. If Y is a closed subspace of X such that T (t)Y ⊆ Y for all t ≥ 0, i.e., if Y is T (t) t≥0 -invariant, then the restrictions T (t)| := T (t)|Y form a strongly continuous semigroup T (t)| t≥0 , called the subspace semigroup, on the Banach space Y . 1.12 Quotient Semigroups. For a closed T (t) t≥0 -invariant subspace Y of X, we consider the quotient Banach space X/ := X/Y with canonical quotient map q : X → X/ . The quotient operators T (t)/ given by T (t)/ q(x) := q T (t)x

for x ∈ X and t ≥ 0

are well-defined and a strongly continuous semigroup, called the quo form tient semigroup T (t)/ t≥0 on X/ . 1.13 Adjoint Semigroups. The adjoint semigroup T (t) t≥0 consisting of all adjoint operators T (t) on the dual space X is, in general, not strongly continuous. An example is provided by the (left) translation group on L1 (R) (see Section 3.c). Its adjoint is the (right) translation group on L∞ (R), which is not strongly continuous (see the proposition in Paragraph 3.15). However, it is easy to see that T (t) t≥0 is always weak∗ -continuous in the sense that the maps t → ξx,x (t) := x, T (t) x = T (t)x, x are continuous for all x ∈ X and x ∈ X . Because on the dual of a reflexive Banach space weak and weak∗ topology coincide, the adjoint semigroup on such spaces is weakly, and hence by Theorem 1.6 strongly, continuous. Proposition. The adjoint semigroup of a strongly continuous semigroup on a reflexive Banach space is again strongly continuous. 1.14 Product Semigroups. Let S(t) t≥0 be another strongly continuous semigroup commuting with T (t) t≥0 ; i.e., S(t)T (t) = T (t)S(t) for all t ≥ 0. Then the operators U (t) := S(t)T (t) form a strongly U (t) t≥0 , called the product semi continuous semigroup group of T (t) t≥0 and S(t) t≥0 .

10


Proof. Clearly, U (0) = I. In order to show the semigroup property for U (t) t≥0 , we first show that T (s) and S(r) commute for all s, r ≥ 0. To this end, we first take r = p1/q and s = p2/q ∈ Q+ . Then p

p

S(r)T (s) = S ( 1/q) 1 · T ( 1/q) 2 p p = T ( 1/q) 2 · S ( 1/q) 1 = T (s)S(r); i.e., F (r, s) = G(r, s) for all r, s ∈ Q+ , where and

F : [0, ∞) × [0, ∞) → L(X),

F (r, s) := S(r)T (s),

G : [0, ∞) × [0, ∞) → L(X),

G(r, s) := T (s)S(r).

Now, for fixed x ∈ X, the functions F (·, ·)x and G(·, ·)x are continuous in each coordinate and coincide on Q+ × Q+ ; hence we conclude that F = G. This shows that S(r)T (s) = T (s)S(r) for all s, r ≥ 0, and the semigroup property U (r + s) = U (r)U (s) for s, r ≥ 0 follows immediately. Finally, the strong continuity of U (t) t≥0 follows from Lemma A.18. 1.15 Exercises. (1) Let Tl (t) t≥0 be the left translation semigroup (cf. Exercise 1.8.(2)) on X := C0 (R+ ) or Cub (R+ ) and take a nonvanishing, continuous function q on R+ such that q and 1/q are bounded. Then the multiplication operator Mq defined by (Mq f )(s) := q(s) · f (s) yields a similarity transformation. Determine the semigroup S(t) t≥0 defined by S(t) := Mq Tl (t)M 1/q ,

t ≥ 0.

(2) On X := C0 (R2 ) = f ∈ C(R2 ) : lim(x,y)→∞ f (x, y) = 0 or Cub (R2 ) := f ∈ C(R2 ) : f is bounded and uniformly continuous endowed with the sup-norm, consider the two semigroups T (t) t≥0 and S(t) t≥0 defined by S(t)f (x, y) := f (x + t, y) and T (t)f (x, y) := f (x, y + t) for f ∈ X, t ≥ 0. Show that both are strongly continuous and determine their product semigroup. (3) Consider the function space Y := f : [0, 1] → C : |f (s)| ≤ ns for all s ∈ [0, 1] and some n ∈ N , which becomes a Banach space for the norm f := inf c ≥ 0 : |f (s)| ≤ cs for all s ∈ [0, 1] .

Section 2. Examples

11

On X := C⊕Y , we define a “translation” semigroup T (t) t≥0 by T (0) := I and T (t) αf := g0 for t > 0, where

⎧ for s < t, ⎨0 for s = t, g(s) := α ⎩ f (s − t) for s > t.

(i) Show that T (t) = t−1 for t ∈ (0, 1), and hence T (t) t≥0 is not exponentially bounded. (ii) Find the largest T (t) t≥0 -invariant closed subspace of X on which the restriction of T (t) t≥0 becomes strongly continuous for t > 0 (t ≥ 0, respectively).

2. Examples In order to create a feeling for the concepts introduced so far, we discuss first the case in which the semigroup T (t) t≥0 can be represented as an tA operator-valued exponential function e t≥0 . Due to this representation, we later consider this case as rather trivial.

a. Finite-Dimensional Systems: Matrix Semigroups We start with a reasonably detailed discussion of the finite-dimensional situation; i.e., X = Cn . Here, L(X) is identified with the space Mn (C) of all complex n × n matrices. Because on Mn (C) all Hausdorff vector space topologies coincide, we simply speak of continuity of a semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X. We want to determine all continuous semigroups on X = Cn and start by looking at the natural examples in the form of matrix exponentials. 2.1 Proposition. For any A ∈ Mn (C) and t ≥ 0, the series (2.1)

etA :=

∞ k k t A k=0

k!

converges absolutely. Moreover, the mapping R+ t → etA ∈ Mn (C) is continuous and satisfies e(t+s)A = etA esA (FE) e0A = I.

for t, s ≥ 0,

12


∞ k k Proof. Because the series k=0 t A /k! converges, one can show, as for the Cauchy product of scalar series, that ∞ k k ∞ ∞ n t A sk Ak tn−k An−k sk Ak · = · k! k! (n − k)! k! n=0

k=0

k=0

k=0

∞ (t + s)n An = . n! n=0

This proves (FE). In order to show that t → etA is continuous, we first observe that by (FE) one has e(t+h)A − etA = etA ehA − I for all t, h ∈ R. Therefore, it suffices to show that limh→0 ehA = I. This follows from the estimate ∞ k k hA h A e − I = k! k=1

≤

∞ |h|k · A k k=1

tA

2.2 Definition. We call e by the matrix A ∈ Mn (C).

t≥0

k!

= e|h|·A − 1.

the (one-parameter ) semigroup generated

As the reader may have already realized, there is no need in Proposition 2.1 (and in Definition 2.2) to restrict the (time) parameter t to R+ . The definition, the continuity, and the functional equation (FE) hold for any real and even complex t. Then the map T (·) : t → etA extends to a continuous (even analytic) homomorphism from the additive group (R, +) (or, (C, +)) into the multiplicative group GL(n, C) of all invertible, complex n × n matrices. We call etA t∈R the (one-parameter ) group generated by A. Before proceeding with the abstract theory, the reader might appreciate some examples of matrix semigroups. 2.3 Examples. (i) The (semi) group generated by a diagonal matrix A = diag(a1 , . . . , an ) is given by etA = diag eta1 , . . . , etan .

Section 2. Examples

13

(ii) Less trivial is the case of a k × k Jordan block ⎛

⎞ ··· 0 . .. . .. ⎟ λ 1 ⎟ ⎟ .. .. .. . . . 0⎟ ⎟ .. .. . . 1⎠ · · · · · · 0 λ k×k

λ

1

⎜0 ⎜ ⎜. A = ⎜ .. ⎜. ⎝. . 0

0

with eigenvalue λ ∈ C. Decompose A into a sum A = D +N where D = λI. Then the kth power of N is zero, and the power series (2.1) (with A replaced by N ) becomes ⎛

(2.2)

etN

1

t

t2 2

···

⎜ ⎜0 1 t ··· ⎜ ⎜. . . =⎜. .. .. ... ⎜. ⎜. .. .. ⎝ .. . . 0 ··· ··· 0

tk−1 (k−1)! tk−2 (k−2)!

.. . t 1

⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠

.

k×k

Because D and N commute, we obtain etA = etλ etN

(2.3) (see Exercise 2.9.(1)).

For arbitrary matrices A, the direct computation of etA (using the above definition) is very difficult if not impossible. Fortunately, thanks to the existence of the Jordan normal form, the following lemma shows that in a certain sense the Examples 2.3.(i) and (ii) suffice. 2.4 Lemma. Let B ∈ Mn (C) and take an invertible matrix S ∈ Mn (C). Then the (semi) group generated by the matrix A := S −1 BS is given by etA = S −1 etB S. Proof. Because Ak = S −1 B k S for all k ∈ N and because S, S −1 are continuous operators, we obtain etA =

∞ k k t A k=0

= S −1

=

∞ k −1 k t S B S

k! k=0

∞ k k t B k=0

k!

k! S = S −1 etB S.

14


The content of this lemma is that similar matrices (for the definition of similarity see Paragraph 1.9) generate similar (semi) groups. Because we know that any complex n × n matrix is similar to a direct sum of Jordan blocks, we conclude that any matrix (semi) group is similar to a direct sum of (semi) groups as in Example 2.3.(ii). Already in the case of 2 × 2 matrices, the necessary computations are lengthy; however, they yield explicit formulas for the matrix exponential function. 2.5 More Examples. (iii) Take an arbitrary 2 × 2 matrix A = ac db , define δ := ad − bc, τ := a + d, and take γ ∈ C such that γ 2 = 1/4(τ 2 − 4δ). Then the (semi) group generated by A is given by the matrices (2.4) etA

⎧ ⎨ e tτ/2 1/γ sinh(tγ)A + cosh(tγ) − τ/2γ sinh(tγ)I = ⎩ tτ/2 e (tA + (1 − tτ/2)I)

if γ = 0, if γ = 0.

We list some special cases yielding simpler formulas:

0 1 cos(t) sin(t) tA A= , e = , −1 0 − sin(t) cos(t)

0 1 cosh(t) sinh(t) A= , etA = , 1 0 sinh(t) cosh(t)

1 1 1+t t A= , etA = . −1 −1 −t 1 − t In the case where the spectral projections of a general n × n matrix are known, the corresponding (semi)group can be calculated explicitly by the following formula. We recall that the minimal polynomial mA of a matrix A is the polynomial of lowest degree with leading coefficient 1 satisfying mA (A) = 0. Moreover, the set of zeros of mA coincides with the spectrum σ(A) of A. 2.6 Proposition. Let A ∈ Mn (C) with eigenvalues λ1 , . . . , λm and respective multiplicities k1 , . . . , km as zeros of the minimal polynomial mA of A. If Pi denotes the spectral projection associated with {λi }, 1 ≤ i ≤ m, (cf. (1.7) in Chapter V), then etA =

m k i −1

etλi

i=1 j=0

tj (A − λi )j Pi j!

for t ∈ R.

Proof. Because the spectral projections Pi , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, sum up to the identity, we have etA =

m i=1

etA Pi =

m i=1

etλi et(A−λi ) Pi .

Section 2. Examples

15

Recall that (A − λi )|rg Pi ki = 0 by Exercise V.1.20.(1). Therefore, we obtain m k i −1 tj etA = etλi (A − λi )j Pi j! i=1 j=0

as claimed.

Returning to one of the questions posed at the very beginning of this text, namely if a given semigroup can be described by a differential equation, we now proceed in two more steps. First, we show that in the case T (t) = etA we even have differentiability of the map t → T (t) (from R to Mn (C)), and that U (t) := etA solves the differential equation (DE)

d dt U (t)

= AU (t) U (0) = I.

for t ≥ 0,

In a second step, we show that a general continuous operator semigroup on X = Cn is even differentiable in t = 0 and is the exponential of its derivative at t = 0. 2.7 Proposition. Let T (t) := etA for some A ∈ Mn (C). Then the function T (·) : R+ → Mn (C) is differentiable and satisfies the differential equation (DE). Conversely, every differentiable function T (·) : R+ → Mn (C) satisfying (DE) is already of the form T (t) = etA for 2 A := T˙ (0) ∈ Mn (C). Proof. We only show that T (·) satisfies (DE). Because the functional equation (FE) in Proposition 2.1 implies T (h) − I T (t + h) − T (t) = · T (t) h h for all t, h ∈ R, (DE) is proved if limh→0 because

T (h)−I h

= A. This, however, follows,

∞ T (h) − I |h|k−1 · A k ≤ − A h k! k=2 |h|·A

=

e

|h|

−1

− A → 0

as h → 0.

The proof of remaining assertions is left to the reader; cf. Exercise 2.9.(5). 2

Here T˙ (0) :=

d T (t)|t=0 . dt

16


2.8 Theorem. Let T (·) : R+ → Mn (C) be a continuous function satisfying (FE). Then there exists A ∈ Mn (C) such that for all t ≥ 0.

T (t) = etA

Proof. Because T (·) is continuous and T (0) = I is invertible, the matrices V (t0 ) :=

t0

T (s) ds 0

are invertible for sufficiently small t0 > 0 (use that limt↓0 1/tV (t) = T (0) = I). The functional equation (FE) now yields t0 T (t + s) ds T (t) = V (t0 )−1 V (t0 )T (t) = V (t0 )−1 0 t+t0 T (s) ds = V (t0 )−1 V (t + t0 ) − V (t) = V (t0 )−1 t

for all t ≥ 0. Hence, T (·) is differentiable with derivative d dt T (t)

T (t + h) − T (t) h T (h) − T (0) = lim T (t) = T˙ (0)T (t) h↓0 h = lim h↓0

for all t ≥ 0.

This shows that T (·) satisfies (DE) with A = T˙ (0).

With this theorem we have characterized all continuous one-parameter (semi) groups on Cn as matrix-valued exponential functions etA t≥0 . 2.9 Exercises. (1) If A, B ∈ Mn (C) commute, then eA+B = eA eB . (2) Let A ∈ Mn (C) be an n × n matrix and denote by mA its minimal polynomial. If p is a polynomial such that p ≡ exp (mod mA ); i.e., if the function (p−exp)/mA can be analytically extended to C, then p(A) = exp(A). Use this fact in order to verify Formula (2.4). (3) Show that A ∈ Mn (C) generates a bounded group, i.e., etA ≤ M for all t ∈ R and some M ≥ 1, if and only if A is similar to a diagonal matrix with purely imaginary entries. (4) Characterize semigroups etA t≥0 satisfying eA = I in terms of the eigenvalues of the matrix A ∈ Mn (C). (5) Show that every differentiable function T (·) : R+ → Mn (C) satisfying (DE) is already of the form T (t) = etA for A := T˙ (0) ∈ Mn (C).

Section 2. Examples

17

(6) For A ∈ Mn (C), we call λ ∈ σ(A) ∩ R a dominant eigenvalue if for all µ ∈ σ(A) \ {λ}

Re µ < λ

and if the Jordan blocks corresponding to λ are all 1 × 1. Show that the following properties are equivalent. (a) The eigenvalue 0 ∈ σ(A) is dominant. (b) There exist P = P 2 ∈ Mn (C) and M ≥ 1, ε > 0 such that tA e − P ≤ M e−εt for all t ≥ 0.

b. Uniformly Continuous Operator Semigroups We now desire to extend the above results to semigroups T (t) t≥0 on an infinite-dimensional Banach space X. To this purpose, it suffices to assume continuity of the map t → T (t) ∈ L(X) in the operator norm. Then we can replace the matrix A ∈ Mn (C) by a bounded operator A ∈ L(X) and argue as in Section 2.a. 2.10 Definition. For A ∈ L(X) we define (2.5)

e

tA

∞ n n t A := n! n=0

for each t ≥ 0. It follows from the completeness of X that etA is a well-defined bounded operator on X. 2.11 Proposition. For A ∈ L(X) define etA t≥0 by (2.5). Then the following properties hold. (i) etA t≥0 is a semigroup on X such that R+ t → etA ∈ (L(X), · ) is continuous. (ii) The map R+ t → T (t) := etA ∈ (L(X), · ) is differentiable and satisfies the differential equation (DE)

= AT (t) for t ≥ 0, T (0) = I.

d dt T (t)

Conversely, every differentiable function T (·) : R+ → (L(X), · ) satisfying (DE) is already of the form T (t) = etA for A = T˙ (0) ∈ L(X). The proof of this result can be adapted from Section 2.a and is left to the reader.

18


Semigroups having the continuity property stated in Proposition 2.11.(i) are called uniformly continuous (or norm-continuous) . 2.12 Theorem. Every uniformly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X is of the form T (t) = etA ,

t ≥ 0,

for some bounded operator A ∈ L(X). Proof. Because the following arguments were already used in the matrixvalued cases (see Section 2.a), a brief outline of the proof should be sufficient. For a uniformly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 the operators

t

T (s) ds,

V (t) :=

t≥0

0

are well-defined, and 1/tV (t) converges (in norm!) to T (0) = I as t ↓ 0. Hence, for t > 0 sufficiently small, the operator V (t) becomes invertible. Repeat now the computations from the proof of Theorem 2.8 in order to obtain that t → T (t) is differentiable and satisfies (DE). Then Proposition 2.11 yields the assertion. Before adding some comments on and further properties of uniformly continuous semigroups we state the following question leading directly to the main objects of this text. 2.13 Problem. Do there exist “natural” one-parameter semigroups of linear operators on Banach spaces that are not uniformly continuous, hence not of the form etA t≥0 for some bounded operator A? 2.14 Comments. (i) The operator A in Theorem 2.12 is determined uniquely as the of T (·) at zero; i.e., A = T˙ (0). We call it the derivative generator of T (t) t≥0 . (ii) Because Definition 2.10 for etA works also for t ∈ R and even for t ∈ C, it follows that each uniformly semigroup can be extended to a continuous uniformly continuous group etA t∈R , or to etA t∈C , respectively. (iii) From the differentiability of t → T (t) it follows that for each x ∈ X the orbit map R+ t → T (t)x ∈ X is differentiable as well. Therefore, the map x(t) := T (t)x is the unique solution of the X-valued initial value problem (or abstract Cauchy problem) x(t) ˙ = Ax(t) for t ≥ 0, (ACP) x(0) = x.

Section 3. More Semigroups

19

2.15 Exercises. (1) On X := C0 (R) := {f ∈ C(R) : lim|s|→∞ f (s) = 0} and for a fixed constant α > 0, we define an operator Aα by the difference quotients Aα f (s) := 1/α f (s + α) − f (s) , f ∈ X, s ∈ R. Show that Aα ∈ L(X) with Aα = 2/α, and hence one has the estimate tA e α ≤ e 2t/α for all t ≥ 0. However, etAα can be computed explicitly as ∞ ( t/α)k −t f (s + kα), etAα f (s) = e /α k! hence it satisfies k=0 tA e α = 1 for all t ≥ 0.

f ∈ X, s ∈ R,

(2) Let X be a Banach space. For which operators T ∈ L(X) can we find A ∈ L(X) such that T = eA ; i.e, which bounded T can be embedded into a uniformly continuous semigroup? (Hint: Find (sufficient) conditions on T such that A := log T can be defined in analogy to Definition 2.10.) Show that such operators T are infinitely divisible; i.e., for each n ∈ N there exists S ∈ L(X) such that S n = T . (3) Show that for A, B ∈ L(X), X a Banach space, the following assertions are equivalent. (a) AB = BA. (b) et(A+B) = etA · etB for all t ∈ R. (Hint: To show that (a) implies (b) proceed as in the proof of Lemma 2.4. For the converse implication, compute the second derivative of the functions appearing in (b).) (4) The reader familiar with Banach algebras should reformulate the notion of “uniformly continuous semigroup” and Theorem 2.12 by replacing the operator algebra L(X) by an arbitrary Banach algebra.

3. More Semigroups In order to convince the reader that new and interesting phenomena appear for semigroups on infinite-dimensional Banach spaces, we first discuss several classes of one-parameter semigroups on concrete spaces. These semigroups are not uniformly continuous anymore and hence, unlike those in Section 2.b, not of the form etA t≥0 for some bounded operator A. On the other hand, they are not “pathological” in the sense of being completely unrelated to any analytic structure as the semigroup constructed in Exercise II.2.13.(4). In addition, these semigroups accompany us through the further development of the theory and provide a source of illuminating examples and counterexamples.

20


a. Multiplication Semigroups on C0 (Ω) Multiplication operators can be considered as an infinite-dimensional generalization of diagonal matrices. They are extremely simple to construct, and most of their properties are evident. Nevertheless, their value should not be underestimated. They appear, for example, naturally in the context of Fourier analysis or when one applies the spectral theorem for self-adjoint operators on Hilbert spaces (see Theorem 3.9). We therefore strongly recommend that any first attempt to illustrate a result or disprove a conjecture on semigroups should be made using multiplication semigroups. We start from a locally compact space Ω and define the Banach space (endowed with the sup-norm f ∞ := sups∈Ω |f (s)|) for all ε > 0 there exists a compact Kε ⊂ Ω C0 (Ω) := f ∈ C(Ω) : such that |f (s)| < ε for all s ∈ Ω \ Kε of all continuous, complex-valued functions on Ω that vanish at infinity. As a typical example the reader might always take Ω to be a bounded or unbounded interval in R. With any continuous function q : Ω → C we associate a linear operator Mq on C0 (Ω) defined on its “maximal domain” D(Mq ) in C0 (Ω). 3.1 Definition. The multiplication operator Mq induced on C0 (Ω) by some continuous function q : Ω → C is defined by Mq f := q · f for all f in the domain D(Mq ) := f ∈ C0 (Ω) : q · f ∈ C0 (Ω) . The main feature of these multiplication operators is that most operatortheoretic properties of Mq can be characterized by analogous properties of the function q. In the following proposition we give some examples for this correspondence. 3.2 Proposition. Let Mq with domain D(Mq ) be the multiplication operator induced on C0 (Ω) by some continuous function q. Then the following assertions hold. (i) The operator (Mq , D(Mq )) is closed and densely defined. (ii) The operator Mq is bounded (with D(Mq ) = C0 (Ω)) if and only if the function q is bounded. In that case, one has Mq = q := sup |q(s)|. s∈Ω

(iii) The operator Mq has a bounded inverse if and only if the function q / q(Ω). In that case, one has has a bounded inverse 1/q; i.e., 0 ∈ Mq−1 = M 1/q . (iv) The spectrum of Mq is the closed range of q; i.e., σ(Mq ) = q(Ω).


21

Proof. (i) The domain D(Mq ) always contains the space Cc (Ω) := f ∈ C(Ω) : supp f is compact of all continuous functions having compact support supp f := {s ∈ Ω : f (s) = 0}. In order to show that these functions form a dense subspace, we first observe that the one-point compactification of Ω is a normal topological space (cf. [Dug66, Chap. XI, Thm. 8.4 and Thm. 1.2] or [Kel75, Chap. 5, Thm. 21 and Thm. 10]). Hence, by Urysohn’s lemma (cf. [Dug66, Chap. VII, Thm. 4.1] or [Kel75, Chap. 4, Lem. 4]), for every compact subset K ⊆ Ω we can find a function hK ∈ C(Ω) still having compact support satisfying3 0 ≤ hK ≤ 1

hK (s) = 1 for all s ∈ K.

and

Then, for each f ∈ C0 (Ω), the function f · hK has compact support, and f − f · hK = sup f (s) 1 − hK (s) s∈Ω\K

≤ 2 sup |f (s)|. s∈Ω\K

This implies that the continuous functions with compact support are dense in C0 (Ω); hence Mq is densely defined. To show the closedness of Mq , we take a sequence (fn )n∈N ⊂ D(Mq ) converging to f ∈ C0 (Ω) such that limn→∞ qfn =: g ∈ C0 (Ω) exists. Clearly, this implies g = qf and hence f ∈ D(Mq ) and Mq f = g. (ii) If q is bounded, we have Mq f = sup |q(s)f (s)| ≤ q · f s∈Ω

for any f ∈ C0 (Ω); hence Mq is bounded with Mq ≤ q . On the other hand, if Mq is bounded, for every s ∈ Ω we choose, again using Urysohn’s lemma, a continuous function fs with compact support satisfying fs = 1 = fs (s). This implies Mq ≥ Mq fs ≥ |q(s)fs (s)| = |q(s)|

for all s ∈ Ω;

hence q is bounded with Mq ≥ q . 3

Here 1 denotes the constant function with 1(s) = 1 for all s ∈ Ω.

22


(iii) If 0 ∈ / q(Ω), then 1/q is a bounded continuous function and M 1/q is the bounded inverse of Mq . Conversely, assume Mq to have a bounded inverse Mq−1 . Then we obtain f ≤ Mq−1 · Mq f

for all f ∈ D(Mq ),

whence (3.1)

δ :=

1 ≤ sup |q(s)f (s)| Mq−1 s∈Ω

for all f ∈ D(Mq ), f = 1.

Now assume inf s∈Ω |q(s)| < δ/2. Then there exists an open set O ⊂ Ω such that |q(s)| < δ/2 for all s ∈ O. On the other hand, by Urysohn’s lemma we find a function f0 ∈ C0 (Ω) such that f0 = 1 and f0 (s) = 0 for all s ∈ Ω \ O. This implies sups∈Ω |q(s)f0 (s)| ≤ δ/2, contradicting (3.1). Hence 0 < δ/2 ≤ |q(s)| for all s ∈ Ω; i.e., M 1/q is bounded, and one easily verifies that it yields the inverse of the operator Mq . (iv) By definition, one has λ ∈ σ(Mq ) if and only if λ−Mq = Mλ−q is not invertible. Thus (iii) applied to the function λ − q yields the assertion. With any continuous function q : Ω → C we now associate the exponential function for s ∈ Ω, t ≥ 0. etq : s → etq(s) It is then immediate that the corresponding multiplication operators Tq (t)f := etq f, f ∈ C0 (Ω), formally satisfy the semigroup law (FE) from Definition 1.1. So, in order to obtain a one-parameter semigroup on C0 (Ω), we have only to make sure that these multiplication operators Tq (t) are bounded operators on C0 (Ω). Using Proposition 3.2.(ii), we see that this is the case if and only if sup |etq(s) | = sup et Re q(s) s∈Ω

s∈Ω

= et sups∈Ω Re q(s) < ∞. This observation leads to the following definition. 3.3 Definition. Let q : Ω → C be a continuous function such that sup Re q(s) < ∞. s∈Ω

Then the semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 defined by

Tq (t)f := etq f for t ≥ 0 and f ∈ C0 (Ω) is called the multiplication semigroup generated by the multiplication operator Mq (or, the function q) on C0 (Ω).


23

By Proposition 2.11.(i) and Theorem 2.12 the semigroup tA Tq (t) t≥0 is uniformly continuous if and only if it is of the form e t≥0 for some bounded operator A. As predicted, this can already be read off from the function q. 3.4 Proposition. The multiplication semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 generated by q : Ω → C is uniformly continuous if and only if q is bounded. Proof. If q and hence Mq are bounded, it is easy to see that Tq (t) coincides with the exponential etMq , hence is uniformly continuous by Proposition 2.11.(i). Now let q be unbounded and choose (sn )n∈N ⊂ Ω such that |q(sn )| → ∞ for n → ∞. Then we take tn := 1/|q(sn )| → 0. Because ez = 1 for all |z| = 1, there exists δ > 0 such that 1 − etn q(sn ) ≥ δ for all n ∈ N. With functions fn ∈ C0 (Ω) satisfying fn = 1 = fn (sn ), we finally obtain Tq (0) − Tq (tn ) ≥ fn − etn q fn ≥ 1 − etn q(sn ) ≥ δ > 0 for all n ∈ N; i.e., Tq (t) t≥0 is not uniformly continuous.

This means that for every unbounded continuous function q : Ω → C satisfying sup Re q(s) < ∞, s∈Ω

we obtain a one-parameter semigroup that is not uniformly continuous, hence to which Theorem 2.12 does not apply. In order to prepare for later developments, we now show that these multiplication semigroups are strongly continuous. 3.5 Proposition. Let Tq (t) t≥0 be the multiplication semigroup generated by a continuous function q : Ω → C satisfying w := sup Re q(s) < ∞. s∈Ω

Then the mappings R+ t → Tq (t)f = etq f ∈ C0 (Ω) are continuous for every f ∈ C0 (Ω).

24


Proof. Let f ∈ C0 (Ω) with f ≤ 1. For ε > 0 take a compact subset K of Ω such that |f (s)| ≤ ε/(e|w| +1) for all s ∈ Ω \ K. Because the exponential function is uniformly continuous on compact sets, there exists t0 ∈ (0, 1] such that tq(s) − 1 ≤ ε e for all s ∈ K and 0 ≤ t ≤ t0 . Hence, we obtain tq e f − f ≤ sup etq(s) − 1 · |f (s)| + e|w| + 1 · sup |f (s)| s∈K

s∈Ω\K

≤ 2ε for all 0 ≤ t ≤ t0 .

Finally, we show that each strongly continuous semigroup consisting of multiplication operators on C0 (Ω) is a multiplication semigroup in the sense of Definition 3.3. 3.6 Proposition. For t ≥ 0, let mt : Ω → C be bounded continuous functions and assume that the corresponding multiplication operators T (t)f := mt · f form a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 of bounded operators on C0 (Ω). Then there exists a continuous function q : Ω → C satisfying sup Re q(s) < ∞ s∈Ω

such that mt (s) = etq(s) for every s ∈ Ω, t ≥ 0. Proof. For fixed s ∈ Ω choose f ∈ C0 (Ω) such that f ≡ 1 in some neighborhood of s. Then, by assumption, R+ t → T (t)f (s) = mt (s) ∈ C is a continuous function satisfying the functional equation (FE) from Definition 1.1. Therefore, by Proposition 2.11 (for X := C), there exists a the map unique q(s) ∈ C such that mt (s) = etq(s) for all t ≥ 0. Because s → mt (s) in a neighborhood of s coincides with s → T (t)f (s) ∈ C0 (Ω), the functions Ω s → etq(s) ∈ C are continuous for all t ≥ 0. In order to show that q is continuous, we first observe that q is on com bounded pact subsets of Ω. In fact, if K ⊂ Ω is compact, then T (t) induces a t≥0 uniformly continuous semigroup TK (t) t≥0 on C(K) given by

TK (t)f (s) = etq(s) f (s),

f ∈ C(K), s ∈ K,


25

and the same arguments as in the second part of the proof of Proposition 3.4 show that q is bounded on K. This implies that the convergence in lim t↓0

etq(s) − 1 = q(s) t

is uniform on compact sets in Ω. Because every point in Ω possesses a compact neighborhood, we conclude that q, being the uniform limit (on tq(s) −1)/t, is continuous compact subsets) of the continuous functions s → (e as well. Finally, the multiplication operators T (t)f = etq · f are supposed to be bounded; hence the real part of q must be bounded from above. We conclude this subsection with some simple observations and concrete examples. 3.7 Examples. (i) On a compact space, every multiplication operator given by a continuous function is already bounded, and hence every multiplication semigroup is uniformly continuous. (ii) We can choose Ω and q in such a way that the closed range of q is a given closed subset of C. When q generates a multiplication semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 , this has obvious consequences for the operators Tq (t). Choose any closed subset Ω of C and define q(s) := s for s ∈ Ω. Then σ(Mq ) = Ω and σ (Tq (t)) = etΩ := {ets : s ∈ Ω} for all t ≥ 0. if Ω ⊆ {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ 0} (or Ω ⊆ iR), we conclude that In particular, Tq (t) t≥0 consists of contractions (or isometries, respectively) on C0 (Ω). (iii) For Ω := N each complex sequence (qn )n∈N ⊂ C defines a multiplication operator (xn )n∈N → (qn · xn )n∈N on the space C0 (Ω) = c0 . For qn := in we obtain a group of isometries T (t)(xn )n∈N = (eint xn )n∈N ,

t ∈ R,

and for qn := −n2 we obtain a semigroup of contractions 2

T (t)(xn )n∈N = (e−n t xn )n∈N ,

t ≥ 0.

(iv) This simple example serves just to explain the first sentence in this subsection. Take Ω = {1, 2, . . . , m} to be a finite set. Then C0 (Ω) is simply Cm , and the multiplication operator (xn ) → (qn · xn ) corresponds to the diagonal matrix A = diag(q1 , . . . , qm ). The corresponding multiplication semigroup is given by etA = diag(etq1 , . . . , etqm ) as in Example 2.3.(i).

26


3.8 Exercises. (1) For a sequence q = (qn )n∈N ⊂ C define the corresponding multiplication operator Mq on X := c0 or X := p , 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞. Show that its point spectrum is given by P σ(Mq ) = {qn : n ∈ N} and that σ(Mq ) = P σ(Mq ). (2) Many properties of the multiplication semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 generated by a multiplication operator Mq on X := C0 (Ω) can be characterized by properties of the function q : Ω → C. (i) Tq (t) t≥0 is bounded (contractive) if and only if Re q(s) ≤ 0

for all s ∈ Ω.

(ii) Tq (t) t≥0 satisfies Tq (2π) = I if and only if q(Ω) ⊆ iZ. −1 (3) Take X := C0 (R) and q(s) := 1+|s| + is, s ∈ R. Show that the growth bound of the corresponding multiplication semigroup T = Tq (t) t≥0 does not satisfy ω0 (T) < 0, whereas

lim Tq (t)f = 0

t→∞

for each f ∈ X.

b. Multiplication Semigroups on Lp (Ω, µ) As claimed at the beginning of the previous subsection, multiplication operators arise in a natural way in various instances. For example, if one applies the Fourier transform to a linear differential operator on L2 (Rn ), this operator becomes a multiplication operator on L2 (Rn ). Moreover, the classical “spectral theorem” asserts that each self-adjoint or, more generally, normal operator4 on a Hilbert space is (isomorphic to) a multiplication operator on some L2 -space. This viewpoint is emphasized in Halmos’s article [Hal63] and motivates our systematic analysis of multiplication operators. We therefore formulate this version of the spectral theorem explicitly (see also [Con85, Chap. 10, Thm. 4.19] or [Wei80, Chap. 7, Thm. 7.33]). 4 We recall that an operator A on a Hilbert space H is called normal if D(A∗ A) = D(AA∗ ) =: D and A∗ Ax = AA∗ x for all x ∈ D; i.e., A∗ A = AA∗ .


27

3.9 Spectral Theorem. If A is a normal operator on a separable Hilbert space H, then there is a σ-finite measure space (Σ, Ω, µ) and a measurable function q : Ω → C such that A is unitarily equivalent to the multiplication operator Mq on L2 (Ω, µ); i.e., there exists a unitary operator U ∈ L H, L2 (Ω, µ) such that the diagram H

⊇ D(A)

A

-

H 6

U

U ∗ =U −1

U

? ? L2 (Ω, µ) ⊇ D(Mq )

Mq

- L2 (Ω, µ)

commutes. In order to define what we mean by a multiplication operator, we take some σ-finite measure space (Ω, Σ, µ); see, e.g., [Hal74, Chap. II] or [Rao87, Chap. 2]. Then, for fixed 1 ≤ p < ∞, we consider the Banach space X := Lp (Ω, µ) of all (equivalence classes of) p-integrable complex functions on Ω endowed with the p-norm

1/p p f p := |f (s)| dµ(s) . Ω

Next, for a measurable function q : Ω → C, we call the set

qess (Ω) := λ ∈ C : µ {s ∈ Ω : |q(s) − λ| < ε} = 0 for all ε > 0 , its essential range and define the associated multiplication operator Mq by

(3.2)

Mq f := q · f for all f in the domain D(Mq ) := f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ) : q · f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ) .

In analogy to Proposition 3.2, we now have the following result.

28


3.10 Proposition. Let Mq with domain D(Mq ) be the multiplication operator induced on Lp (Ω, µ) by some measurable function q. Then the following assertions hold. (i) The operator (Mq , D(Mq )) is closed and densely defined. (ii) The operator Mq is bounded (with D(Mq ) = Lp (Ω, µ)) if and only if the function q is essentially bounded; i.e., the set qess (Ω) is bounded in C. In this case, one has Mq = q ∞ := sup |λ| : λ ∈ qess (Ω) . / qess (Ω). In (iii) The operator Mq has a bounded inverse if and only if 0 ∈ that case, one has Mq−1 = Mr for r : Ω → C defined by r(s) :=

1/q(s) 0

if q(s) = 0, if q(s) = 0.

(iv) The spectrum of Mq is the essential range of q; i.e., σ(Mq ) = qess (Ω).

The proof uses measure theory and is left as Exercise 3.13.(2). Also, the other results of Section 3.a, after the appropriate changes, remain valid in the Lp -case. For the convenience of the reader and due to their importance for the applications, we state them explicitly. The proofs, however, are left as Exercises 3.13.(3) and (4). 3.11 Proposition. Let Tq (t) t≥0 be the multiplication semigroup generated by a measurable function q : Ω → C satisfying ess sup Re q(s) := s∈Ω

sup

Re λ < ∞;

λ∈qess (Ω)

i.e., Tq (t)f := etq f

for every f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ), t ≥ 0.

Then the mappings R+ t → Tq (t)f = etq f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ) are continuous for every f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ). Moreover, the semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 is uniformly continuous if and only if q is essentially bounded.


29

3.12 Proposition. For t ≥ 0, let mt : Ω → C be bounded measurable functions and assume that (i) The corresponding multiplication operators T (t)f := mt · f form a semigroup T (t) t≥0 of bounded operators on Lp (Ω, µ), and (ii) The mappings R+ t → T (t)f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ) are continuous for every f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ); i.e. T (t) t≥0 is strongly continuous. Then there exists a measurable function q : Ω → C satisfying ess sup Re q(s) := s∈Ω

sup

Re λ < ∞

λ∈qess (Ω)

such that mt = etq almost everywhere for every t ≥ 0. p 3.13 Exercises. (1) On the spaces X := c0 and X := , 1 ≤ p < ∞, there exist multiplication semigroups Tq (t) t≥0 such that each Tq (t), t > 0, is a compact operator. Construct concrete examples. Observe that this is not possible if (i) The function spaces are X := C0 (R) or X := Lp (R), or if (ii) The function q is bounded. (2) Prove Proposition 3.10. (Hints: To prove that Mq is closed, use the fact that every convergent sequence in Lp (Ω, µ) has a µ-almost everywhere convergent subsequence; see, e.g., [Rud86, Chap. 3, Thm. 3.12]. In order to show that Mq is densely defined, combine the fact that Ω is σ-finite with Lebesgue’s convergence theorem (cf. [Rud86, Chap. 1, 1.34]). For the “only if” part of (ii), assume q not to be essentially bounded and choose suitable characteristic functions to conclude that Mq is unbounded. In the “only if” part of (iii), show first that Mq−1 is given by a multiplication operator and then apply (ii).) (3) Prove Proposition 3.11. (Hint: Use Lebesgue’s convergence theorem.) (4) Prove Proposition 3.12. (5) For every measurable function q : Ω → C we can define the multiplication operator Mq on L∞ (Ω, µ) as we did for Lp (Ω, µ), 1 ≤ p < ∞. Show that Mq is densely defined if and only if q is essentially bounded. (6) Let A := Mq be a multiplication operator on Lp (Ω,µ), 1 ≤ p < ∞. Show that λ ∈ C is an eigenvalue of A if and only if µ {s ∈ Ω : q(s) = λ} > 0.

30


(7) A bounded linear operator T : Lp (Ω, µ) → Lp (Ω, µ), 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, is called local if for every measurable subset S ⊂ Ω one has T f = T g almost everywhere on S if f = g almost everywhere on S. Show that every local operator is a multiplication operator Mq for some q ∈ L∞ (Ω, µ). Extend this characterization to unbounded multiplication operators. (Hint: See [Nag86, C-II, Thm. 5.13].)

c. Translation Semigroups Another important class of examples is obtained by “translating,” to the left or to the right, complex-valued functions defined on (subsets of) R. We first define these “translation operators” and only then specify the appropriate spaces. 3.14 Definition. For a function f : R → C and t ≥ 0, we call Tl (t)f (s) := f (s + t), s ∈ R, the left translation (of f by t), and Tr (t)f (s) := f (s − t),

s ∈ R,

is the right translation (of f by t). It is immediately clear that the operators Tl (t) (and Tr (t)) satisfy the semigroup law (FE). We have only to choose appropriate function spaces to produce one-parameter operator semigroups. For that purpose, we start with spaces of continuous or integrable functions and the translation on all of R. 3.15 Translations on R. As Banach space X we take one of the spaces • X∞ := L∞ (R) of all bounded measurable functions on R, • Xb := Cb (R) of all bounded continuous functions on R, • Xub := Cub (R) of all bounded, uniformly continuous functions on R, • X0 := C0 (R) of all continuous functions on R vanishing at infinity, • X2π := C2π (R) of all 2π-periodic continuous functions on R, all endowed with the sup-norm · ∞ , or we take the spaces • Xp := Lp (R), 1 ≤ p < ∞, of all p-integrable functions on R endowed with the corresponding p-norm · p . Then each left translation operator Tl (t) is an isometry on each of these spaces, as inverse the having right translation operator Tr (t). This means that Tl (t) t∈R and Tr (t) t∈R form one-parameter groups on X, called the (left or right) translation group. For our purposes, the following continuity properties of these translation groups on the various function spaces are fundamental.


31

Proposition. The (left) translation group Tl (t) t∈R (a) Is not uniformly continuous on any of the above spaces; (b) Is strongly continuous on Xub , X0 and on Xp for all 1 ≤ p < ∞. Proof. The proof of (a) is left as Exercise 3.19.(4). (b) The strong continuity of Tl (t) t∈R on Xub and X0 is a direct consequence of the uniform continuity of any f in Xub and X0 . So it remains to show strong continuity on Xp = Lp (R). It is evident that each T (t) is a contraction, so T (t) t≥0 is uniformly bounded on R. Now take a continuous function f on R with compact support and observe that it is uniformly continuous. Therefore, lim T (t)f − f ∞ = lim sup f (t + s) − f (s) = 0, t↓0

t↓0 s∈R

and because the p-norm (for functions on bounded intervals) is weaker, lim T (t)f − f p = 0. t↓0

Because the continuous functions with compact support are dense in Lp (R) for all 1 ≤ p < ∞, the assertion now follows from the adaptation of Proposition 1.3 to groups (see Exercise 1.8.(4)). We now modify the spaces on which translation takes place. As a first case, we consider functions defined on R+ only. 3.16 Translations on R+ . In analogy to Paragraph 3.15, let X denote one of the spaces • X∞ := L∞ (R+ ) of all bounded measurable functions on R+ , • Xb := Cb (R+ ) of all bounded continuous functions on R+ , • Xub := Cub (R+ ) of all bounded, uniformly continuous functions on R+ , • X0 := C0 (R+ ) of all continuous functions on R+ vanishing at infinity, • Xp := Lp (R+ ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, of all p-integrable functions on R+ , and observe that the left translations Tl (t) are well-defined contractions on these spaces, but now yield a semi group only, called the left translation semigroup Tl (t) t≥0 on R+ . For the right translations Tr (t), however, the value Tr (t)f (s) = f (s−t) is not defined if s − t < 0. To overcome this obstacle, we put f (s − t) for s − t ≥ 0, Tr (t)f (s) := f (0) for s − t < 0 for f ∈ X = Xb , Xub , X0 , and

Tr (t)f (s) :=

f (s − t) for s − t ≥ 0, 0 for s − t < 0

32


for f ∈ Xp . In this way, we again obtain semigroups of contractions on X called the right translation semigroups Tr (t) t≥0 on R+ . Clearly, the continuity properties stated in the proposition in Paragraph 3.15 prevail. it is not to see that on Xp , for 1 < p < ∞, the semigroups Moreover, difficult Tl (t) t≥0 and Tr (t) t≥0 are adjoint; i.e., Tl (t) on Xp coincides with Tr (t) on Xp where 1/p + 1/p = 1. Even on function spaces on finite intervals, we can define translation semigroups. 3.17 Translations on finite intervals. If we take the Banach space C[a, b] and look at the left translations, we have to specify the values Tl (t)f (s) for s + t > b. Imitating the idea above, we put f (s + t) for s + t ≤ b, Tl (t)f (s) := f (b) for s + t > b. We note that this choice is not the only one to extend the translations to a semigroup on C[a, b] (see, e.g., Paragraph II.3.29). In any case, we still call Tl (t) t≥0 a left translation semigroup on C[a, b]. By a similar definition, fixing the value at the left endpoint, we obtain a right translation semigroup Tr (t) t≥0 on the space C[a, b]. On the Banach spaces Lp [a, b], 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, we can modify this definition by taking f (s + t) for s + t ≤ b, Tl (t)f (s) := 0 for s + t > b, and again this yields a semigroup. However, now a completely new phenomenon appears: this semigroup, i.e., this “exponential function,” vanishes for t > b − a. Proposition. The left translation semigroup Tl (t) t≥0 is nilpotent on Lp [a, b]; that is, Tl (t) = 0 for all t ≥ b − a. 3.18 Rotations on the torus. Take Γ := {z ∈ C : |z| = 1} and X := C(Γ). Then the operators T (t), t ∈ R, defined by T (t)f (s) := f eit · s for f ∈ C(Γ) and s ∈ Γ form the so-called rotation group. It enjoys the same continuity properties as the translation group on Xub in Paragraph 3.16. This can be seen by identifying C(Γ) with the Banach space C2π (R) ⊂ Xub of all 2π-periodic continuous functions on R. After this the above rotation identification, group becomes the translation group Tl (t) t∈R on C2π (R) satisfying T (2π) = I. We call such a group periodic (of period 2π).


33

Because the operators T (t) are isometries for the p-norm and because C(Γ) is dense in Lp (Γ, µ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, and µ the Lebesgue measure on Γ, the above definition can be extended to f ∈ Lp (Γ, µ), and we obtain a periodic rotation group on each Lp -space for 1 ≤ p < ∞. 3.19 Exercises. (1) Show that the space Cub (R) of all bounded, uniformly continuous functions on R is the maximal X of Cb (R) such that subspace the orbits of the left translation group Tl (t) t∈R ; i.e., the mappings R t → Tl (t)f ∈ Cb (R), become continuous for each f ∈ X. (2) Show that in the context of Paragraphs 3.15 and 3.16 and on the corresponding Lp -spaces, the right translation semigroups are the adjoints of the left translation semigroups; i.e., Tl (t) = Tr (t)

for t ≥ 0.

(3) more (left) translation semigroups on Lp [a, b] by defining Construct Tl (t)f (s) for s + t > b in an appropriate way. For example, take α ∈ C and put Tl (t)f (s) := αk f s + t − k(b − a) for s + t − a ∈ [k(b − a), (k + 1)(b − a)], k = 0, 1, 2, . . .. This semigroup becomes nilpotent for α = 0, whereas it is periodic for α = 1. For which α is this semigroup contractive? (4) Prove part (a) of the proposition in Paragraph 3.15. (5) Take X := C0 (Rn ) or Cub (Rn ) and choose some B ∈ M n (R). Show that (T (t)f )(s) := f (etB s) for t ∈ R, f ∈ X, defines a group T (t) t∈R on X which is strongly continuous on C0 (Rn ) but not on Cub (Rn ).

Chapter II Semigroups, Generators, and Resolvents

In this chapter it is our aim to achieve what we obtained, without too much effort, for uniformly continuous semigroups in Section I.2.b. There, we characterized every uniformly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X as an operator-valued exponential function; i.e., we found an operator A ∈ L(X) such that

T (t) = etA

for all t ≥ 0 (see Theorem I.2.12). For strongly continuous semigroups, we succeed in defining an analogue of A, called the generator of the semigroup. It is a linear, but generally unbounded, operator defined only on a dense subspace D(A) of the Banach space X. In order to retrieve the semigroup T (t) t≥0 from its generator A, D(A) , we need a third object, namely the resolvent λ → R(λ, A) := (λ − A)−1 ∈ L(X) of A, which is defined for all complex numbers in the resolvent set ρ(A). For the basic concepts from spectral theory we refer to Section V.1.a. To find and discuss the various relations between these objects is the theme of this chapter, which can be illustrated by the following triangle. 34

Section 1. Generators of Semigroups and Their Resolvents

35

T (t) t≥0

semigroup @ @ generator A, D(A)

@ @

resolvent R(λ, A) λ∈ρ(A)

1. Generators of Semigroups and Their Resolvents We recall that for a one-parameter semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X uniform continuity implies differentiability of the map t → T (t) ∈ L(X). The right derivative of T (·) at t = 0 then yields a bounded operator A for which T (t) = etA for all t ≥ 0. We now hope that strong continuity of a semigroup T (t) t≥0 still implies some differentiability of the orbit maps ξx : t → T (t)x ∈ X. In order to pursue this idea we first show, in analogy to Proposition I.1.3, that differentiability of ξx is already implied by right differentiability at t = 0. 1.1 Lemma. Take a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 and an element x ∈ X. For the orbit map ξx : t → T (t)x, the following properties are equivalent. (a) ξx (·) is differentiable on R+ . (b) ξx (·) is right differentiable at t = 0. Proof. We have only to show that (b) implies (a). For h > 0, one has lim h1 T (t + h)x − T (t)x = T (t) lim h1 T (h)x − x h↓0

h↓0

= T (t) ξ˙x (0), and hence ξx (·) is right differentiable on R+ . On the other hand, for −t ≤ h < 0, we write 1 ˙x (0) = T (t + h) 1 x − T (−h)x − ξ˙x (0) T (t + h)x − T (t)x − T (t) ξ h h + T (t + h)ξ˙x (0) − T (t)ξ˙x (0). As h ↑ 0, the first term on the right-hand side converges to zero, because T (t + h) remains bounded. The remaining part converges to zero by the strong continuity of T (t) t≥0 . Hence, ξx is also left differentiable, and its derivative is (1.1) ξ˙x (t) = T (t) ξ˙x (0) for each t ≥ 0.

36

Chapter II. Semigroups, Generators, and Resolvents

On the subspace of X consisting of all those x for which the orbit maps ξx are differentiable, the right derivative at t = 0 then yields an operator A from which we obtain, in a sense to be specified later, the operators T (t) as the “exponentials etA .” This is already expressed in the choice of the term “generator” in the following definition. 1.2 Definition. The generator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X is the operator Ax := ξ˙x (0) = lim h1 T (h)x − x

(1.2)

h↓0

defined for every x in its domain D(A) := {x ∈ X : ξx is differentiable in R+ }.

(1.3)

We observe from Lemma 1.1 that the domain D(A) is also given as the set of all elements x ∈ X for which ξx (·) is right differentiable in t = 0; i.e.,

(1.4) D(A) = x ∈ X : lim h1 T (h)x − x exists . h↓0

The domain D(A), which is a linear subspace, is an essential part of the definition of the generator A. Accordingly, we should always denote it by the pair A, D(A) , but for convenience, we often only write A and assume implicitly that its domain is given by (1.4). To ensure that the operator A, D(A) has reasonable properties, we proceed as in Chapter I. There we used the “smoothing operators” V (t) := t T (s) ds to prove differentiability of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 (see the 0 proof of Theorem I.2.12). Because we now assume that the orbit maps ξx are only continuous, we need to look at “smoothed” elements of the form yt :=

1 t

t

ξx (s) ds = 0

1 t

t

T (s)x ds

for x ∈ X, t > 0.

0

It is a simple consequence of the definition of the integral as a limit of Riemann sums that the vectors yt converge to x as t ↓ 0. In addition, they always belong to the domain D(A). This and other elementary facts are collected in the following result. 1.3 Lemma. For the generator A, D(A) of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , the following properties hold. (i) A : D(A) ⊆ X → X is a linear operator. (ii) If x ∈ D(A), then T (t)x ∈ D(A) and (1.5)

d dt T (t)x

= T (t)Ax = AT (t)x for all t ≥ 0.


37

(iii) For every t ≥ 0 and x ∈ X, one has t T (s)x ds ∈ D(A). 0

(iv) For every t ≥ 0, one has (1.6) (1.7)

t T (t)x − x = A T (s)x ds if x ∈ X, 0 t T (s)Ax ds if x ∈ D(A). = 0

Proof. Assertion (i) is trivial. To prove (ii) take x ∈ D(A). Then it follows from (1.1) that 1/h T (t + h)x − T (t)x converges to T (t)Ax as h ↓ 0. Therefore, 1 lim T (h)T (t)x − T (t)x h↓0 h exists, and hence T (t)x ∈ D(A) by (1.4) with AT (t)x = T (t)Ax. The proof of assertion (iii) is included in the following proof of (iv). For x ∈ X and t ≥ 0, one has

t t 1 T (h) T (s)x ds − T (s)x ds h 0 0 t 1 t 1 T (s + h)x ds − T (s)x ds = h 0 h 0 1 t+h 1 t = T (s)x ds − T (s)x ds h h h 0 1 t+h 1 h = T (s)x ds − T (s)x ds, h t h 0 which converges to T (t)x − x as h ↓ 0. Hence (1.6) holds. If x ∈ D(A), then the functions s → T (s) (T (h)x−x)/h converge uniformly on [0, t] to the function s → T (s)Ax as h ↓ 0. Therefore, t t 1 1 lim T (h) − I T (s)x ds = lim T (s) T (h) − I x ds h↓0 h h↓0 h 0 0 t = T (s)Ax ds. 0

With the help of this lemma we now show that the generator introduced in Definition 1.2, although unbounded in general, has nice properties. 1.4 Theorem. The generator of a strongly continuous semigroup is a closed and densely defined linear operator that determines the semigroup uniquely.

38


Proof. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X. As already noted, its generator A, D(A) is a linear operator. To show that A is closed, consider a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) for which limn→∞ xn = x and limn→∞ Axn = y exist. By (1.7) in the previous lemma, we have t T (s)Axn ds T (t)xn − xn = 0

for t > 0. The uniform convergence of T (·)Axn on [0, t] for n → ∞ implies that t T (s)y ds. T (t)x − x = 0

Multiplying both sides by 1/t and taking the limit as t ↓ 0, we see that x ∈ D(A) and Ax = y; i.e., A is closed. t 1 By Lemma 1.3.(iii) the elements /t 0 T (s)x ds always belong to D(A). Because the strong continuity of T (t) t≥0 implies 1 t lim T (s)x ds = x t↓0 t 0 for every x ∈ X, we conclude that D(A) is dense in X. Finally, let S(t) t≥0 be another strongly continuous semigroup having the same generator A, D(A) . For x ∈ D(A) and t > 0, we consider the map s → ηx (s) := T (t − s)S(s)x for 0 ≤ s ≤ t. Because for fixed s the set S(s + h)x − S(s)x : h ∈ (0, 1] ∪ {AS(s)x} h is compact, the difference quotients 1 1 ηx (s + h) − ηx (s) = T (t − s − h) S(s + h)x − S(s)x h h 1 + T (t − s − h) − T (t − s) S(s)x h converge by Lemma I.1.2 and Lemma 1.3.(ii) to d ds ηx (s)

= T (t − s)AS(s)x − AT (t − s)S(s)x = 0.

From ηx (0) = T (t)x and ηx (t) = S(t)x we obtain T (t)x = S(t)x for all x in the dense domain D(A). Hence, T (t) = S(t) for each t ≥ 0. Combining these properties of the generator with the closed graph theorem gives a new characterization of uniformly continuous semigroups, thus complementing Theorem I.2.12.


39

1.5 Corollary. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X with generator A, D(A) , the following assertions are equivalent. (a) The generator A is bounded; i.e., there exists M > 0 such that Ax ≤ M x for all x ∈ D(A). (b) The domain D(A) is all of X. (c) The domain D(A) is closed in X. (d) The semigroup T (t) t≥0 is uniformly continuous. In each case, the semigroup is given by T (t) = etA :=

∞ n n t A , n! n=0

t ≥ 0.

The proof of this corollary and of some more equivalences is left as Exercise 1.15.(1). Property (b) indicates that the domain of the generator contains important information about the semigroup and therefore has to be taken into account carefully. However, in many examples (see, e.g., Paragraph 2.6 and Example 4.11 below) it is often routine to compute the expression Ax for some or even many elements in the domain D(A), although it is difficult to identify D(A) precisely. In these situations, the following concept helps to distinguish between “small” and “large” subspaces of D(A). 1.6 Definition. A subspace D of the domain D(A) of a linear operator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X is called a core for A if D is dense in D(A) for the graph norm x A := x + Ax . We now state a useful criterion for subspaces to be a core for the generator. 1.7 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X. A subspace D of D(A) that is · -dense in X and invariant under the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is always a core for A. Proof. For every x ∈ D(A) we can find a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D such that limn→∞ xn = x. Because for each n the map s → T (s)xn ∈ D is continuous for the graph norm · A (use (1.5)), it follows that

t

T (s)xn ds, 0

40


being a Riemann integral, belongs to the · A -closure of D. Similarly, the · A -continuity of s → T (s)x for x ∈ D(A) implies that t 1 →0 T (s)x ds − x t 0 A t t 1 1 T (s)xn ds − T (s)x ds →0 t t 0 0 A

as t ↓ 0 and as n → ∞ and for each t > 0.

This proves that for every ε > 0 we can find t > 0 and n ∈ N such that t 1 T (s)xn ds − x t < ε. 0 A Hence, x ∈ D ·A .

Important examples of cores are given by the domains D(An ) of the powers An of a generator A. 1.8 Proposition. For the generator A, D(A) of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 the space D(A∞ ) :=

D(An ),

n∈N

hence each D(An ) := x ∈ D(An−1 ) : An−1 x ∈ D(A) , is a core for A. Proof. Because the space D(A∞ ) is a T (t) t≥0 -invariant subspace of D(A), it remains to show that it is dense in X. To that purpose, we prove that for each function ϕ ∈ C∞ (−∞, ∞) with compact support in (0, ∞) and each x ∈ X the element ∞ xϕ := ϕ(s)T (s)x ds 0

belongs to D(A∞ ). In fact, if we set D := ϕ ∈ C∞ (−∞, ∞) : supp ϕ is compact in (0, ∞) , then for x ∈ X, ϕ ∈ D, and h > 0 sufficiently small we have T (h) − I 1 ∞ ϕ(s) T (s + h) − T (s) x ds xϕ = h h 0 1 ∞ 1 h = ϕ(s − h) − ϕ(s) T (s)x ds − ϕ(s)T (s)x ds h h 0 ∞h 1 (1.8) ϕ(s − h) − ϕ(s) T (s)x ds. = h 0


41

The integrand in (1.8) converges uniformly on [0, ∞) to −ϕ (s)T (s)x as h ↓ 0. This shows that xϕ ∈ D(A) and ∞ Axϕ = − ϕ (s)T (s)x ds. 0

Because ϕ(n) ∈ D for all n ∈ N, we conclude by induction that xϕ ∈ D(An ) for all n ∈ N; i.e., xϕ ∈ D(A∞ ). Assume that the linear span D := lin xϕ : x ∈ X, ϕ ∈ D is not dense in X. By the Hahn–Banach theorem there is a linear functional 0 = x ∈ X such that y, x = 0 for all y ∈ D; i.e., ∞ # " ∞ ! ϕ(s) T (s)x, x ds = ϕ(s) T (s)x ds, x = 0 (1.9) 0

0

for all x ∈ X !and ϕ ∈ D. This implies that the continuous functions s → T (s)x, x vanish on [0, ∞) for all x ∈ X. Otherwise there would exist ϕ ∈ D such that the left-hand side of (1.9) does not vanish. Choosing s = 0, we obtain x, x = 0 for all x ∈ X; hence x = 0. This contradicts the choice of x = 0, and therefore D ⊂ X is dense. ∞ Because we have seen in the first step that D ⊂ D(A ), and because ∞ D(A ) is invariant under T (t) t≥0 , the assertion follows from Proposition 1.7. In the remaining part of this section we introduce some basic spectral properties for generators of strongly continuous semigroups. Such properties are studied in more detail in Section V.1.a. We start by introducing the relevant notions (see also Definition V.1.1) spectrum σ(A) := {λ ∈ C : λ − A is not bijective}, resolvent set ρ(A) := C \ σ(A), and resolvent R(λ, A) := (λ − A)−1 at λ ∈ ρ(A) for a closed operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X. Our starting points are the following two identities, which are easily derived from their predecessors in Lemma 1.3.(iv). We stress that these identities will be used very frequently throughout these notes. 1.9 Lemma. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Then, for every λ ∈ C and t > 0, the following identities hold. t −λt (1.10) e T (t)x − x = (A − λ) e−λs T (s)x ds if x ∈ X, 0 t (1.11) e−λs T (s)(A − λ)x ds if x ∈ D(A). = 0

Proof. It suffices to apply Lemma 1.3.(iv) to the rescaled semigroup S(t) := e−λt T (t),

t ≥ 0,

whose generator is B := A − λ with domain D(B) = D(A).

42


Next, we give an important formula relating the semigroup to the resolvent of its generator. 1.10 Theorem. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on the Banach space X and take constants w ∈ R, M ≥ 1 (see Proposition I.1.4) such that T (t) ≤ M ewt

(1.12)

for t ≥ 0. For the generator A, D(A) of T (t) t≥0 the following properties hold. ∞ (i) If λ ∈ C such that R(λ)x := 0 e−λs T (s)x ds exists for all x ∈ X, then λ ∈ ρ(A) and R(λ, A) = R(λ). (ii) If Re λ > w, then λ ∈ ρ(A), and the resolvent is given by the integral expression in (i). (iii) R(λ, A) ≤

M Re λ−w

for all Re λ > w.

The formula for R(λ, A) in (i) is called the integral representation of the resolvent. Of course, the integral has to be understood as an improper Riemann integral; i.e., (1.13)

t

R(λ, A)x = lim

t→∞

e−λs T (s)x ds

0

for all x ∈ X. Having in mind this interpretation, we frequently write (1.14)

R(λ, A) =

∞

e−λs T (s) ds.

0

Proof of Theorem 1.10. (i) By a simple rescaling argument (cf. Paragraph I.1.10) we may assume that λ = 0. Then, for arbitrary x ∈ X and h > 0, we have T (h) − I T (h) − I ∞ T (s)x ds R(0)x = h h 0 ∞ 1 1 ∞ = T (s + h)x ds − T (s)x ds h 0 h ∞ ∞ 0 1 1 = T (s)x ds − T (s)x ds h h h 0 1 h =− T (s)x ds. h 0


43

By taking the limit as h ↓ 0, we conclude that1 rg R(0) ⊆ D(A) and AR(0) = −I. On the other hand, for x ∈ D(A) we have

t

lim

t→∞

and

T (s)x ds = R(0)x, 0

t→∞

t

lim A

T (s)x ds = lim

T (s)Ax ds = R(0)Ax,

t→∞

0

t

0

where we have used Lemma 1.3.(iv) for the second equality. Because by Theorem 1.4 the operator A is closed, this implies R(0)Ax = AR(0)x = −x and therefore R(0) = (−A)−1 as claimed. Parts (ii) and (iii) then follow easily from (i) and the estimate t t −λs e T (s) ds ≤ M e(w−Re λ)s ds, 0

0

because for Re λ > w the right-hand side converges to

M/(Re λ−w)

as t → ∞.

The above integral representation can now be used to represent and estimate the powers of R(λ, A). 1.11 Corollary. For the generator A, D(A) of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfying T (t) ≤ M ewt

for all t ≥ 0,

one has, for Re λ > w and n ∈ N, that (1.15) (1.16)

(−1)n−1 dn−1 · R(λ, A)x (n − 1)! dλn−1 ∞ 1 = sn−1 e−λs T (s)x ds (n − 1)! 0

R(λ, A)n x =

for all x ∈ X. In particular, the estimates (1.17)

R(λ, A)n ≤

M (Re λ − w)n

hold for all n ∈ N and Re λ > w. 1

Here rg T := T X indicates the range of an operator T : X → Y .

44


Proof. Equation (1.15) is actually valid for every operator with nonempty resolvent set; see Proposition V.1.3.(ii). On the other hand, Theorem 1.10.(i) implies ∞ d d e−λs T (s)x ds R(λ, A)x = dλ dλ 0 ∞ =− se−λs T (s)x ds 0

for Re λ > w and all x ∈ X. Proceeding by induction, we deduce (1.16). Finally, the estimate (1.17) follows from ∞ 1 n−1 −λs R(λ, A)n x = s e T (s)x ds · (n − 1)! 0 ∞ M · ≤ sn−1 e(w−Re λ)s ds · x (n − 1)! 0 M = · x (Re λ − w)n for all x ∈ X. Property (ii) in Theorem 1.10 says that the spectrum of a semigroup generator is always contained in a left half-plane. The number determining the smallest such half-plane is an important characteristic of any linear operator and is now defined explicitly. 1.12 Definition. With any linear operator A we associate its spectral bound defined by s(A) := sup{Re λ : λ ∈ σ(A)}. As an immediate consequence of Theorem 1.10.(ii) the following relation holds between the growth bound of a strongly continuous semigroup (see Definition I.1.5) and the spectral bound of its generator. 1.13 Corollary. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A, one has −∞ ≤ s(A) ≤ ω0 < +∞. 1.14 Diagram. To conclude this section, we collect in a diagram the information obtained so far on the relations between a semigroup, its generator, and its resolvent. T (t) t≥0 @

@

Ax=lim t↓0

T (t)x−x t

A, D(A)

∞ @ R(λ,A)= e−λt T (t) dt, Re λ>ω0 @ 0 @ @ @ R R(λ,A)=(λ−A)−1 - R(λ, A) A=λ−R(λ,A)−1

λ∈ρ(A)


45

By developing our theory further, we are able to add one of the missing links in this diagram (see Diagram IV.2.6 below). 1.15 Exercises. (1) Prove that the statements (a)–(d) in Corollary 1.5 are equivalent to each of the following conditions. (e) T (t) − I ≤ ct for 0 ≤ t ≤ 1 and some c > 0. (f) limλ→∞ λAR(λ, A) < ∞. (2) Show that for a closed linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X and a linear subspace Y ⊂ D(A) the following assertions are equivalent. (a) Y is a core for A, D(A) . (b) A|Y = A. If, in addition, ρ(A) = ∅, then these assertions are equivalent to (c) (λ − A)Y is dense in X for one/all λ ∈ ρ(A). (3) Show that the space of all continuous functions with compact support forms a core for each multiplication operator Mq on C0 (Ω). (4) Decide whether D := f ∈ C∞ (R+ ) : f (0) = 0 and supp f is compact is a core for (i) The generator of the left translation semigroup on C0 (R+ ), and (ii) The generator of the right translation semigroup on C0 (R+ ), as defined in Paragraph I.3.16. (Hint: Compare the hint in (Exercise 6.iii).) (5) Consider the Banach space X := C0 (Ω) for some compact space locally Ω. Show that for a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) with generator t≥0 A, D(A) on X the following statements are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is a semigroup of algebra homomorphisms on X; i.e., T (t)(f · g) = T (t)f · T (t)g for f, g ∈ X and t ≥ 0. (b) A, D(A) is a derivation; i.e., D(A) is a subalgebra of X and A(f · g) = (Af ) · g + f · Ag for f, g ∈ D(A). (Hint: For the implication (b) ⇒ (a) consider the maps s → T (t−s)[T (s)f · T (s)g] for each 0 ≤ s ≤ t and f, g ∈ D(A). For more information see [Nag86, B-II, Sect. 3]) (6) Let A, D(A) be the generator of a contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 on some Banach space X. Establish the following assertions. (i) The Landau–Kolmogorov inequality, which states that Ax 2 ≤ 4 A2 x · x for each x ∈ D(A2 ). (Hint: As a first step, verify Taylor’s formula t T (t)x = x + tAx + (t − s)T (s)A2 x ds 0

for x ∈ D(A ).) 2

46


(ii) If T (t) t≥0 is a group of isometries, then (i) can be improved to 2 Ax ≤ 2 A2 x · x for x ∈ D(A2 ). (iii) Apply (i) and (ii) to the various translation semigroups of Section I.3.c, in particular to the left translation semigroup on Lp (R+ ). (Hint: The generator of the (left) translation semigroup is the differentiation operator with appropriate domain; see Paragraph 2.9. For details see [Gol85, p.65])

2. Examples Revisited Before proceeding with the abstract theory, we pause for a moment and examine the concrete semigroups from Section I.3 and the semigroup constructions established in Section I.1.b. In each case, we try to identify the corresponding generator , its spectrum and resolvent, so that our abstract definitions gain a more concrete meaning. However, the impatient reader might skip these examples and proceed with Section 3.

a. Standard Constructions Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A, D(A) on a Banach space X. For each of the semigroups constructed in Section I.1.b, we now characterize its generator and its resolvent. 2.1 Similar Semigroups. If V is an isomorphism from a Banach space Y onto X and S(t) t≥0 is the strongly continuous semigroup on Y given by S(t) := V −1 T (t)V , then its generator is B = V −1 AV

with domain D(B) = y ∈ Y : V y ∈ D(A) .

Equality of the spectra σ(A) = σ(B) is clear, and the resolvent of B is R(λ, B) = V −1 R(λ, A)V for λ ∈ ρ(A). A particularly important example of this situation is given by the Spectral Theorem I.3.9, which states that every normal or self-adjoint operator on a Hilbert space is similar to a multiplication operator on an L2 -space.

Section 2. Examples Revisited

47

2.2 Rescaled Semigroups. The rescaled semigroup eµt T (αt) t≥0 for some fixed µ ∈ C and α > 0 has generator B = αA + µI

with domain D(A) = D(B).

Moreover, σ(B) = ασ(A) + µ and R(λ, B) = 1/αR ( λ−µ/α, A) for λ ∈ ρ(B). This shows that we can switch quite easily between the original and the rescaled objects. 2.3 Subspace Semigroups. Although in Paragraph I.1.11 we considered the subspace semigroup T (t)|Y t≥0 only for closed subspaces Y in X, we begin here with a more general situation. Let Y be a Banach space that is continuously embedded in X (in symbols: Y → X). Assume also that the restrictions T (t)| leave Y invariant and form a strongly continuous semigroup T (t)| t≥0 on Y . In order to be able to identify the generator of T (t)|Y t≥0 , we introduce the following concept. Definition. The part of A in Y is the operator A| defined by A| y := Ay D(A| ) := y ∈ D(A) ∩ Y : Ay ∈ Y .

with domain

In other words, A| is the “maximal” operator induced by A on Y and, as shown next, coincides with the generator of the semigroup T (t)| t≥0 on the subspace Y . Proposition. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X.If the restricted semigroup T (t)| t≥0 is strongly Banach continuous on some T (t) t≥0 -invariant space Y → X, then the generator of T (t)| t≥0 is the part A| , D(A| ) of A in Y . Proof. Let C, D(C) denote the generator of T (t)| t≥0 . Because Y is continuously embedded in X, we immediately have that C is a restriction of A| . For the converse inclusion, choose λ ∈ R large enough such that both R(λ, C) and R(λ, A) are given by the integral representation from Theorem 1.10.(i). Then R(λ, C)y =

∞

e−λs T (s)y ds = R(λ, A)y

for all

y ∈ Y.

0

For x ∈ D(A| ), we obtain that x = R(λ, A)(λ − A)x = R(λ, C)(λ − A)x ∈ D(C), and hence D(A| ) = D(C).

48


If Y is a T (t) t≥0 -invariant closed subspace of X, then the strong continuity of T (t)| t≥0 is automatic. Moreover, the existence of z := lim t↓0

1 T (t)y − y ∈ X t

for some y ∈ Y implies that z ∈ Y . Therefore, the part A| simply becomes the “restriction” of A. Corollary. If Y is a T (t) t≥0 -invariant closed subspace of X, then the generator of T (t)| t≥0 is A| y = Ay,

with domain

D(A| ) = D(A) ∩ Y.

Example. A typical example for the situation considered here occurs when we take X := L1 (Γ, m) and Y := C(Γ). The rotation group from I.3.18 is strongly continuous on both spaces; hence its generator on C(Γ) is the part of its generator on L1 (Γ, m). The generator on L1 (Γ, m) can now be obtained as the first derivative by modifying the arguments from the proposition in Paragraph 2.9.(ii) below. 2.4 Quotient Semigroup. Let Y be a T (t) t≥0 -invariant closed subspace of X. Then the generator A/ , D(AX/ ) of the quotient semigroup T (t)/Y t≥0 on the quotient space X/ := /Y is given (with the notation from Paragraph I.1.12) by with domain D(A/ ) = q D(A) .

A/ q(x) = q(Ax)

This follows from the fact that each element x $ := q(x) ∈ D(A/ ) can be written as ∞ e−λs T (s)/ y$ ds x $= 0

for some y$ = q(y) ∈ x $=

∞

e 0

X

−λs

/Y and some λ > ω0 (use 1.10.(i)). Therefore,

q T (s)y ds = q

∞

e

−λs

T (s)y ds

= q(z)

0

with z ∈ D(A). This means that for every x $ ∈ D(A/ ) there exists a representative z ∈ X belonging to D(A). For a concrete example, we refer to Paragraph 2.10.


49

2.5 Adjoint Semigroups. Even though the adjoint semigroup T (t) t≥0 is not necessarily strongly continuous on X , it is still possible to associate a “generator” with it. In fact, defining 1 Aσ x := σ(X , X)- lim T (h) x − x , h↓0 h 1 σ D(A ) := x ∈ X : σ(X , X)- lim T (h) x − x exists , h↓0 h one obtains a linear operator called the weak∗ generator of T (t) t≥0 . It is a σ(X , X)-closed and σ(X , X)-densely defined operator and coincides with the adjoint A of A (see Definition A.12); i.e., there exists y ∈ X such that D(Aσ ) = x ∈ X : x, y = Ax, x for all x ∈ D(A) and

Aσ x = A x .

(See Exercise 2.7.) By Corollary A.16 it then follows that σ(Aσ ) = σ(A) = σ(A ) and R(λ, Aσ ) = R(λ, A ) = R(λ, A) for λ ∈ ρ(A). 2.6 Product Semigroups. Let of a second B,D(B) be the generator with T (t) t≥0 . It is strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 commuting easy to deduce someinformation on the generator C, D(C) of the product semigroup U (t) t≥0 , defined by U (t) := S(t)T (t) for t ≥ 0; see Paragraph I.1.14. We first show that D(A)∩D(B) satisfies the conditions of Proposition 1.7 and so is a core for C. Because T (t) t≥0 and S(t) t≥0 commute, each domain D(A)and D(B) is invariant under both semigroups. Hence D(A) ∩ D(B) is U (t) t≥0 ∞ invariant. Take λ large enough such that R(λ, A) = 0 e−λs T (s) ds and ∞ −λs S(s) ds. From these representations we deduce that R(λ, B) = 0 e the resolvent operators commute; i.e., R(λ, A)R(λ, B) = R(λ, B)R(λ, A). Therefore, R(λ, B) maps D(A) into D(A), and so R(λ, B)R(λ, A)X is contained in D(A) ∩ D(B). Because both R(λ, A) and R(λ, B) are continuous and have dense range, we conclude that D(A) ∩ D(B) is dense in X, i.e., is a core for C. Now, by Lemma A.19, the map R+ t → U (t)x is differentiable for all elements x ∈ D(A) ∩ D(B). Moreover, its derivative at t = 0 is %d & dt U (t)x (0) = Cx = Ax + Bx, which determines the generator C of U (t) t≥0 on the core D(A) ∩ D(B). 2.7 Exercise. Show that the operator Aσ defined in Paragraph 2.5 is σ(X , X)-closed, σ(X , X)-densely defined, and that it coincides with the adjoint A of A.

50


b. Standard Examples In this subsection we return to the examples of strongly continuous semigroups introduced in Chapter I, Section 3, and identify the corresponding generators and resolvent operators. We start with multiplication semigroups for which all operators involved can be computed explicitly. 2.8 Multiplication Semigroups. We saw in Proposition I.3.6 (or Proposition I.3.12) that strongly continuous multiplication semigroups on spaces C0 (Ω) (or Lp (Ω, µ)) are multiplications by etq , t ≥ 0, for some continuous (or measurable) function q : Ω → C with real part (essentially) bounded above. It should be no surprise that this function also yields the generator of the semigroup. Lemma. The A, D(A) of a strongly continuous multiplication generator semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X := C0 (Ω) or X := Lp (Ω, µ) defined by Tq (t)f := etq · f,

f ∈ X and t ≥ 0,

is given by the multiplication operator Af = Mq f := q · f with domain D(A) = D(Mq ) := {f ∈ X : qf ∈ X}. Proof. Let X := C0 (Ω) and take f ∈ D(A). Then lim t↓0

etq f − f etq(s) f (s) − f (s) (s) = lim = q(s)f (s) t↓0 t t

exists for all s ∈ Ω, and we obtain qf ∈ C0 (Ω). This shows that D(A) ⊆ D(Mq ) and that Af = Mq f . Because by Theorem 1.10.(ii) and Proposition I.3.2.(iv), respectively, A − λ and Mq − λ are both invertible for λ sufficiently large, this implies A = Mq . The proof for X := Lp (Ω, µ) is left as Exercise 2.13.(2). This lemma, in combination with Propositions I.3.5 and I.3.6 (or Propositions I.3.11 and I.3.12), completely characterizes the generators of strongly continuous multiplication semigroups. We restate this in the following result by identifying the closed (or the essential) range of q with the spectrum of Mq ; see Proposition I.3.2.(iv) (or Proposition I.3.10.(iv)). Proposition. For an operator A, D(A) on the Banach space C0 (Ω) or Lp (Ω, µ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, the following assertions are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) is the generator of a strongly continuous multiplication semigroup. (b) A, D(A) is a multiplication operator such that {λ ∈ C : Re λ > w} ⊆ ρ(A)

for some w ∈ R.


51

The remarkable feature of this proposition is the fact that condition (b), which corresponds to the spectral condition (ii) from Theorem 1.10, already guarantees the existence of a corresponding semigroup. This is in sharp contrast to the situation for general semigroups (see Generation Theorems 3.5 and 3.8 below). 2.9 Translation Semigroups. As seen in Paragraph I.3.15, the (left) translation operators Tl (t)f (s) := f (s + t),

s, t ∈ R,

define a strongly continuous (semi) groupon the spaces Cub (R) and Lp (R), 1 ≤ p < ∞. In each case, the generator A, D(A) is given by differentiation, but we have to adapt its domain to the underlying space. Proposition 1. The generator of the (left) translation semigroup Tl (t) t≥0 on the space X is given by Af := f with domain: (i) D(A) = f ∈ Cub (R) : f differentiable and f ∈ Cub (R) , if X := Cub (R), and (ii) D(A) = f ∈ Lp (R) : f absolutely continuous and f ∈ Lp (R) , if X := Lp (R), 1 ≤ p < ∞. Proof. It suffices to show that B, D(B) of Tl (t) t≥0 the generator is of the operator A, D(A) defined above. In fact, because a restriction Tl (t) t≥0 is a contraction semigroup on X, Theorem 1.10.(ii) implies 1 ∈ ρ(B). On the other hand, by Proposition 2 below, we know that 1 ∈ ρ(A), and therefore the inclusion B ⊆ A will imply A = B. (i) Fix f ∈ D(B). Because δ0 is a continuous linear form on Cub (R), the function R+ t → δ0 Tl (t)f = f (t) is differentiable by Lemma 1.1 and Definition 1.2, and Bf =

%d

&

dt Tl (t)f t=0

=

%d

dt f (t

& + ·) t=0 = f .

This proves D(B) ⊆ D(A) and A|D(B) = B. Hence, A = B as mentioned above.

52


(ii) Take f ∈ D(B) and set g := Bf ∈ Lp (R). Because integration over compact intervals is continuous in Lp (R), we obtain for every a, b ∈ R that b 1 b+h f (s + h) − f (s) 1 a+h ds f (s) ds − f (s) ds = h b h a h a b converges to a g(s) ds as h ↓ 0. However, the left-hand side converges to f (b) − f (a) for almost all a, b; see [Tay85, Thm. 9-8 VI]. By redefining f on a null set we obtain b g(s) ds + f (a), b ∈ R, f (b) = a

which is an absolutely continuous function with derivative (almost everywhere) equal to g. Again this shows that D(B) ⊆ D(A) and A|D(B) = B. It follows that A = B as above. In order to finish this proof, we give an explicit formula for the resolvent of the differentiation operator A with “maximal” domain D(A) as specified in the previous result. The simple proof is left as Exercise 2.13.(1). Proposition 2. The resolvent R(λ, A) for Re λ > 0 of the differentiation operator A with maximal domain D(A) (i.e., of the generator of the left translation semigroup) on any of the above spaces X is given by ∞ (2.1) R(λ, A)f (s) = e−λ(τ −s) f (τ ) dτ for f ∈ X, s ∈ R. s

Clearly, there are many other function spaces on which the translations define a strongly continuous semigroup. As soon as they are contained in Lp (R) or Cub (R), for example, Proposition 2.3 allows us to identify the generator as the part of the differentiation operator. This, and the quotient construction from Paragraph 2.4, yield the generators of the translation semigroups on R+ and on finite intervals (see Paragraphs I.3.16 and I.3.17). We present an example for this argument. 2.10 Translation Semigroups (Continued). Consider the (left) translation (semi) group from Paragraph 2.9 on the space X := L1 (R). Then the closed subspace Y := f ∈ L1 (R) : f (s) = 0 for s ≥ 1 , which is isomorphic to L1(−∞,1), is T (t) t≥0 -invariant. The generator of the subspace semigroup T (t)| t≥0 is A| f = f with domain D(A| ) =

f is absolutely continuous, f ∈ L (R) : . f ∈ L1 (R) and f (s) = 0 for s ≥ 1 1


53

In Y and for the subspace semigroup T (t)| t≥0 , the space Z := f ∈ Y : f (s) = 0 for 0 ≤ s ≤ 1 is again closed and invariant. The quotient space Y /Z is isomorphic to L1 [0, 1], and the quotient semigroup is isomorphic to the nilpotent (left) translation semigroup from Paragraph I.3.17. By Paragraph 2.4, we obtain for its generator A|/ that A| / f = f with domain D(A|/ ) =

f is absolutely continuous, f ∈ L [0, 1] : . f ∈ L1 [0, 1] and f (1) = 0 1

As above, its resolvent can be determined explicitly using (1.13). We obtain for every λ ∈ C that (2.2)

1

R(λ, A|/ )f (s) =

e−λ(τ −s) f (τ ) dτ

for f ∈ L1 [0, 1], s ∈ [0, 1].

s

In the previous examples we always started with an explicit semigroup and then identified its generator. In the final two examples we look at (second-order) differential operators and show by direct computation that they generate strongly continuous semigroups. 2.11 Diffusion Semigroups (One-Dimensional). Consider the Banach space X := C[0, 1] and the differential operator with domain

Af := f D(A) := f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0 .

This domain is a dense subspace of X that is complete for the graph norm; hence A, D(A) is a closed, densely defined operator. Each function s → en (s) :=

1 √

2 cos(πns)

if n = 0, if n ≥ 1,

belongs to D(A) and satisfies (2.3)

Aen = −π 2 n2 en .

By the Stone–Weierstrass theorem and elementary trigonometric identities we conclude that (2.4)

Y := lin{en : n ≥ 0}

54


is a dense subalgebra of X. Consider the rank-one operators

1 en ⊗ en : f → f, en en := f (s)en (s) ds en , 0

that satisfy en ⊗ en ≤ 2 and (en ⊗ en ) em = δnm em

(2.5)

for all n, m ≥ 0. They can be used to define, for t > 0, the operators (2.6)

T (t) :=

∞

e−π

2

n2 t

· en ⊗ en .

n=0

For f ∈ C[0, 1] and s ∈ [0, 1], this means that 1 T (t)f (s) = (2.7) kt (s, r)f (r) dr, 0

where kt (s, r) : = 1 + 2

e−π

2

n2 t

cos(πns) · cos(πnr).

n∈N

The Jacobi identity wt (s) := √

1 −(s+2n)2/4t 1 −π2 n2 t e = + e cos(πns) 2 4πt n∈Z n∈N

(see [SD80, Kap. I, Satz 10.4]) and various trigonometric relations imply that for each t > 0, the kernel kt (·, ·) satisfies kt (s, r) = wt (s + r) + wt (s − r). Hence, kt (·, ·) is a positive continuous function on [0, 1]2 , and we obtain 1 T (t) = T (t)1 = sup kt (s, r) dr = 1. s∈[0,1]

0

Using the identity (2.5), one easily verifies that on the one-dimensional subspaces generated by en , n ≥ 0, the operators T (t) satisfy the semigroup law (FE), which by continuity then holds on all of X. Similarly, the strong continuity holds on Y and hence, by Proposition I.1.3, on X. These considerations already prove most of the following result. Proposition. The above operators T (t), t ≥ 0, with T (0) = I form a strongly continuous semigroup on X := C[0, 1] whose generator is given by with domain

Af = f , D(A) = f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0 .


55

Proof. It remains only to show that the generator B of T (t) t≥0 coincides with A. To this end, we first observe thatthe subspace Y defined by (2.4) is dense in X, contained in D(B), and T (t) t≥0 -invariant. Hence, by Proposition 1.7, it is a core for B. Next, using the definition of T (t) and Formula (2.5), it follows that A and B coincide on Y . Therefore, we obtain that B = A|Y and, in particular, that B is a restriction of A. From the theory of linear ordinary differential equations it follows that 1 ∈ ρ(A). Moreover, by Theorem 1.10.(ii), we know that 1 ∈ ρ(B), and therefore A = B. 2.12 Diffusion Semigroups (n-Dimensional). The following classical example was one of the main sources for the development of semigroup theory. It describes heat flow, diffusion processes, or Brownian motion and bears names such as heat semigroup, Gaussian semigroup, or diffusion semigroup. We consider it on X := Lp (Rn ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, where it is defined explicitly by (2.8)

T (t)f (s) := (4πt)

−n/ 2

e

−|s−r|2/ 4t

f (r) dr

Rn

for t > 0, s ∈ Rn , and f ∈ X. By putting µt (s) := (4πt)

−n/ 2

e

−|s|2/ 4t

,

this can be written as T (t)f (s) = µt ∗ f (s). Proposition. The above operators T (t), for t > 0 and with T (0) = I, form a strongly continuous semigroup on Lp (Rn ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, and its generator A coincides with the closure of the Laplace operator n ∂2 f (s1 , . . . , sn ) ∆f (s) := ∂s2i i=1

defined for every f in the Schwartz space

S (Rn ) := f ∈ C∞ (Rn ) : lim |x|k Dα f (x) = 0 for all k ∈ N and α ∈ Nn |x|→∞

(see [EN00, Def. VI.5.1]). Proof. The integral defining T (t)f (s) exists for every f ∈ Lp (Rn ), because µt ∈ S (Rn ). Moreover, T (t)f p ≤ µt 1 · f p ≤ f p

56


by Young’s inequality (see [RS75, p. 28]). Hence, each T (t) is a contraction on Lp . Because S (Rn ) is dense in Lp and invariant under T (t), it suffices to study T (t)|S (Rn ) . This is done using the Fourier transformation F, which leaves S (Rn ) invariant. By the usual properties of F (see [Rud73, Thm. 7.2]) one obtains F(µt ∗ f ) = F(µt ) · F(f ) for each f ∈ S (Rn ). Because F(µt )(ξ) = e−|ξ|

2

t

n 1 for ξ ∈ Rn , where |ξ| := ( i=1 ξi2 ) /2 , we see that F transforms the semigroup T (t)|S (Rn ) t≥0 into a multiplication semigroup on S (Rn ), which is pointwise continuous for the usual topology on S (Rn ). Moreover, direct computations as in Lemma 2.8 show that the right derivative at t = 0 is the multiplication operator Bg(ξ) := −|ξ|2 g(ξ) for ξ ∈ Rn , g ∈ S (Rn ). Pulling this information back via the inverse Fourier transformation shows that T (t) t≥0 satisfies the semigroup law. Because the topology of S (Rn ) is finer than the one induced from Lp (Rn ), we also obtain strong continuity on S (Rn ), hence on Lp (Rn ). Finally, we observe that the inverse Fourier transformation of the multiplication operator B is the Laplace operator. Because S (Rn ) is dense and T (t) t≥0 invariant, by Proposition 1.7 we have therefore determined the generator A of T (t) t≥0 on a core of its domain. For generalizations of this example we refer to [ABHN01, Expl. 3.7.6 and Chap. 8], [EN00, Sect. VI.5], and [Lun95, Chap. 3]. In particular, we mention that (2.8) also defines a strongly continuous semigroup on Cub (Rn ). Its n generator is given by the closure of the Laplacian ∆ with domain C∞ b (R ). 2.13 Exercises. (1) Compute the resolvent operators of the generators of the various translation semigroups on R, R+ , or on finite intervals. In particular, deduce the resolvent representation (2.1). (Hint: Use the integral representation (1.14).) Determine from this the generator and its domain as already found in Paragraphs 2.9 and 2.10. (2) Prove the lemma in Paragraph 2.8 for X := Lp (Ω, µ). (3) Let X := L∞ (R). Show that (i) A multiplication semigroup on X is strongly continuous if and only if it is uniformly continuous, and (ii) The translation (semi) group is not strongly continuous.


57

Remark that Lotz in [Lot85] showed that a strongly continuous semigroup on a class of Banach spaces containing all L∞ -spaces is necessarily uniformly continuous. See also [Nag86, A-II.3]. ∞ (4∗ ) Consider the translation (semi) group T (t) t∈R on X := L (R) and the closed, T (t) t∈R -invariant subspace Y := Cub (R). The quotient operators T (t)/ define a contraction (semi) group on X/Y whose orbits t → T (t)/ are continuous (differentiable) only if f$ = 0. Note that in this way we obtained a noncontinuous, but not pathological, solution of Problem I.2.13. (Hint: See [NP94].)

c. Sobolev Towers In the spirit of Section 2.a, we continue to associate new semigroups on new spaces with a given strongly continuous semigroup. The constructions here are inspired by the classical Sobolev and distribution spaces and yield an important tool for abstract theory as well as for concrete applications (see [Haa06, Chap. 6], [HHK06], [Sin05]). We start by considering a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A, D(A) on a Banach space X. After applying the rescaling procedure, and hence without loss of generality (see Paragraph 2.2 and Exercise 2.22.(1)), we can assume that its growth bound ω0 is negative. Therefore, its generator A is invertible with A−1 ∈ L(X). On the domains D(An ) of its powers An , we now introduce new norms · n . 2.14 Definition. For each n ∈ N and x ∈ D(An ), we define the n-norm x n := An x and call Xn := (D(An ), · n ) the Sobolev space of order n associated with T (t) t≥0 . The operators T (t) restricted to Xn are denoted by Tn (t) := T (t)|Xn .

It turns out that the restrictions Tn (t) behave surprisingly well on Xn .

58


2.15 Proposition. With the above definitions, the following hold. (i) Each Xn is a Banach space. (ii) The operators Tn (t) form a strongly continuous semigroup Tn (t) t≥0 on Xn . (iii) The generator An of Tn (t) t≥0 is given by the part of A in Xn ; i.e., An x = Ax

for x ∈ D(An ) with

D(An ) : = {x ∈ Xn : Ax ∈ Xn } = D(An+1 ) = Xn+1 . Proof. The assertion follows by induction if we prove the case n = 1. Assertion (i) follows, because A is a closed operator and · 1 is equivalent to the graph norm, as can be seen from the estimate x A = A−1 Ax + Ax ≤ A−1 + 1 · x 1 ≤ A−1 + 1 · x A for x ∈ X1 . From Lemma 1.3.(ii), we know that T (t) maps X1 into X1 . Each T1 (t) is bounded, because T1 (t)x 1 = T (t)Ax ≤ T (t) · x 1

for x ∈ X1 ,

so T1 (t) t≥0 is a semigroup on X1 . The strong continuity follows from T1 (t)x − x 1 = T (t)Ax − Ax → 0

for t ↓ 0

and x ∈ X1 .

Finally, (iii) follows from the proposition in Paragraph 2.3 on subspace semigroups. We visualize the above spaces and semigroups by a diagram. Before doing so, we point out that by definition, An is an isometry (with inverse A−1 n ) from Xn+1 onto Xn . Moreover, we write X0 := X, T0 (t) := T (t) and A0 := A. X0 6

T0 (t)

A−1 0

A0

X1

T1 (t)

6

A2

6 .. .

? - X1 = D(A0 ), · 1 A−1 1

A1

X2

- X0

T2 (t)

? - X2 = D(A1 ), · 2 = D(A20 ), · 2 A−1 2

? .. .


59

Observe that each Xn+1 is densely embedded in Xn but also, via An , isometrically isomorphic to X . In addition, the semigroup T (t) is n n+1 the restriction of Tn (t) t≥0 , but also similar to Tn (t) t≥0 . We state this important property explicitly. 2.16 Corollary. All the strongly continuous semigroups Tn (t) t≥0 on the spaces Xn are similar. More precisely, one has Tn+1 (t) = A−1 n Tn (t)An = Tn (t)|Xn+1

for all n ≥ 0.

This similarity implies that spectrum, spectral bound, growth bound, etc. coincide for all the semigroups Tn (t) t≥0 . In our construction, we obtained the (n + 1)st Sobolev space from the nth Sobolev space. However, because Xn+1 is a dense subspace of Xn (by Theorem 1.4), it is possible to invert this procedure and obtain Xn from Xn+1 as the completion of Xn+1 for the norm x n := A−1 n+1 x n+1 . This observation permits us to extend the above diagram to the negative integers and to define extrapolation spaces or Sobolev spaces of negative order . 2.17 Definition. For each n ∈ N and x ∈ X−n+1 , we define (recursively) the norm x −n := A−1 −n+1 x −n+1 and call the completion ∼ X−n := X−n+1 , · −n the Sobolev space of order −n associated with T0 (t) t≥0 . Moreover, we denote the continuous extensions of the operators T−n+1 (t) to the extrapolated space X−n by T−n (t). Note that these extended operators T−n (t) have properties analogous to the ones stated in Proposition 2.15; hence our previous results hold for all n ∈ Z. 2.18 Theorem. With the above definitions, the following hold for all m ≥ n ∈ Z. (i) Each Xn is a Banach space containing Xm as a dense subspace. (ii) The operators Tn (t) form a strongly continuous semigroup Tn (t) t≥0 on Xn . (iii) The generator An of Tn (t) t≥0 has domain D(An ) = Xn+1 and is the unique continuous extension of Am : Xm+1 → Xm to an isometry from Xn+1 onto Xn .

60


Proof. It suffices to prove the assertions for m = 0 and n = −1 only. In this case, (i) holds true by definition. From T0 (t)x −1 = T0 (t)A−1 0 x 0 ≤ T0 (t) · x −1 , we see that T0 (t) extends continuously to X−1 . The semigroup property holds for T0 (t) t≥0 on X0 , hence for T−1 (t) t≥0 on X−1 . Similarly, the strong continuity follows, because it holds on the dense subset X0 (even for the stronger norm · 0 ). To prove (iii), we observe first that A−1 extends A0 , because T−1 (t) extends T0 (t). The closedness of A−1 then implies X0 ⊆ D(A−1 ). Because X0 is dense in X−1 and T−1 (t) t≥0 -invariant, it is a core for A−1 by Proposition 1.7. Now, on X0 the graph norm · A−1 is equivalent to · ; hence X0 is a Banach space for · A−1 , and therefore X0 = D(A−1 ). The remaining assertions follow from the fact that A0 : D(A0 ) ⊂ X0 → X−1 , by definition of the norms, is an isometry. So, we have constructed a two-sided infinite sequence of Banach spaces and strongly continuous semigroups thereon. Again we visualize this Sobolev tower associated with the semigroup T0 (t) t≥0 by a diagram. Note that Corollary 2.16 now holds for all n ∈ Z. In addition, if we start this construction from any level, i.e., from the semigroup Tk (t) t≥0 on the space Xk for some k ∈ Z, we will obtain the same scale of spaces and semigroups. 2.19 Diagram. .. . A−2 6 X−1

.. . A−1 −2

T−1 (t)

6 T0 (t)

A1

6 .. .

? - X0 A−1 0

A0

X1

- X−1 = X0 , · −1 ∼ A−1 −1

A−1

X0 6

?

T1 (t)

? - X1 = D(A0 ), · 1 A−1 1

? .. .

We point out again that each space Xn is the completion (unique up to isomorphism) of any of its subspaces Xm whenever m ≥ n ∈ Z.


61

For multiplication semigroups it is easy to identify all Sobolev spaces with concrete function spaces. 2.20 Example. We take X0 := C0 (Ω) and q : Ω → C continuous assuming, for simplicity, that sups∈Ω Re q(s) < 0. As in Section I.3.a, we define Mq f := q · f and the corresponding multiplication semigroup by Tq (t)f := etq · f for t ≥ 0, f ∈ X. The Sobolev spaces Xn are then given by (2.9) Xn = q −n · f : f ∈ X = g ∈ C(Ω) : q n · g ∈ X0 for all n ∈ Z. Note that the analogous statement holds if we start from X0 := Lp (Ω, µ)

for 1 ≤ p < ∞,

a measurable function q : Ω → C satisfying ess sup s∈Ω Re q(s) < 0, and the corresponding multiplication semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 (cf. Section I.3.b). In particular, (2.9) becomes (2.10) Xn = Lp Ω, |q|np · µ for all n ∈ Z. These abstract Sobolev spaces look quite familiar if we consider the translation semigroups and their generators from Paragraph 2.9. 2.21 Examples. (i) First, we look at the (left) translation group Tl (t) t∈R on X := L2 (R) as discussed in Paragraph 2.9. If by F we denote the Fourier −1 transform, then by Plancherel’s equation (2π) /2 F maps L2 (R) isometri cally onto L2 (R) and transforms Tl (t) t∈R into the multiplication group T$(t) t∈R given by T$(t)f (ξ) = eitξ · f (ξ)

for f ∈ L2 (R), ξ ∈ R.

(Note that this is a concrete version of the Spectral Theorem I.3.9.) The generator of T$(t) t∈R is the multiplication operator given by the function q$ : ξ → iξ; hence the associated Sobolev spaces have been determined in Example 2.20 as $n = ξ → (1 − iξ)−n · f (ξ) : f ∈ L2 (R) X for all n ∈ Z. If we now apply the inverse Fourier transform (and its extension to the space of distributions), we obtain the Sobolev spaces associated with the translation group as Xn = (1 − D)−n f : f ∈ L2 (R) , where D denotes the distributional derivative. Hence, Xn coincides with the usual Sobolev space W2,n (R) for all n ∈ Z.

62


(ii) In the case of the translation group Tl (t) t∈R on X := C0 (R), we can avoid the use of the Fourier transform and work in the space of test functions D(R) and its dual D(R) (see [Rud73, Chap. 6]) to obtain an analogous characterization of Xn . For n ≥ 1, the spaces Xn are easy to identify as f is n-times differentiable and . Xn = f ∈ C0 (R) : (k) f ∈ C0 (R) for k = 1, . . . , n To find the Sobolev spaces of negative order, we only consider the case n = −1 and recall that X−1 is the set of (equivalence classes of) Cauchy sequences in X for the norm f −1 := R(1, A)f for f ∈ X and A the generator of Tl (t) t∈R . Then each such · −1 -Cauchy sequence (fn )n∈N defines a distribution F ∈ D(R) by " # F, ϕ := lim R(1, A)fn , ϕ + ϕ n→∞

This shows that X−1 is continuously embedded in the space for ϕ ∈ D(R). D (R), σ(D , D) . Because A−1 is the continuous extension of the classical derivative defined on X1 , it coincides with the distributional derivative D, and hence X−1 = F ∈ D : F = f − Df for some f ∈ C0 (R) . 2.22 Exercises. (1) Let A, D(A) be a closed densely defined operator on X such that ρ(A) = ∅. Prove the following. (i) For each fixed n ∈ N, all the norms x n,λ := (λ − A)n x, x ∈ D(An ), are equivalent for λ ∈ ρ(A). (ii) For each fixed n ∈ N, all the norms x −n,λ := R(λ, A)n x,

x ∈ X,

are equivalent for λ ∈ ρ(A). (iii) Now take λ = 0 ∈ ρ(A) and define the Sobolev spaces Xn , n ∈ Z, as in Definition 2.14 and Definition 2.17. Then the operator A can be restricted/extended to an isometry from Xn+1 onto Xn for each n ∈ Z. (2) Identify the abstract Sobolev spaces Xn in Example 2.20 assuming only that sups∈R Re q(s) < ∞. (3) Show that an operator A, D(A) on X with ρ(A) = ∅ is bounded if and only if Xn = X for all n ∈ Z.

Section 3. Generation Theorems

63

(4) Take an operator A, D(A) with ρ(A) = ∅ on the Banach space X. Show that the dual of the extrapolated Sobolev space X−1 is canonically isomorphic to the domain D(A ) of the adjoint A in X endowed with the graph norm. (5) Show thatfor two densely defined operators A, D(A) with ρ(A) = ∅ and B, D(B) on the Banach space X the following assertions are equivalent. (i) D(A ) ⊆ D(B ). (ii) R(λ, A)B ∈ L(X) for one (hence, all) λ ∈ ρ(A). A (iii) B : D(B) ⊆ X → X−1 is bounded; i.e., B can be extended to a A . bounded operator from X to X−1

3. Generation Theorems We now turn to the fundamental problem of semigroup theory, which is to find arrows in Diagram 1.14 leading from the generator (or its resolvent) to the semigroup. This means that we discuss the following problem. 3.1 Problem. Characterize those linear operators that are generators of some strongly continuous semigroup, and describe how the semigroup is generated.

a. Hille–Yosida Theorems In Theorems 1.4 and 1.10, we already saw that generators • Are necessarily closed operators, • Have dense domain, and • Have their spectrum contained in some proper left half-plane. These conditions, however, are not sufficient. 3.2 Example. On the space X := f ∈ C0 (R+ ) : f continuously differentiable on [0, 1] endowed with the norm f := sup |f (s)| + sup |f (s)|, s∈R+

s∈[0,1]

we consider the operator A, D(A) defined by Af := f

for f ∈ D(A) := f ∈ C10 (R+ ) : f ∈ X .

64


Then A is closed and densely defined, its resolvent exists for Re λ > 0, and can be expressed by ∞ R(λ, A)f (s) = e−λ(τ −s) f (τ ) dτ for f ∈ X, s ≥ 0 s

(compare Assume now that A generates a strongly continuous semi (2.1)). group T (t) t≥0 on X. For f ∈ D(A) and 0 ≤ s, t we define ξ(τ ) := T (t − τ )f (s + τ ), 0 ≤ τ ≤ t, which is a differentiable function. Its derivative satisfies ˙ ) := − T (t − τ )Af (s + τ ) + T (t − τ )f (s + τ ) = 0, ξ(τ and hence

T (t)f (s) = ξ(0) = ξ(t) = f (s + t). This proves that T (t) t≥0 must be the (left) translation semigroup. The translation operators, however, do not map X into itself.

This indicates that we need more assumptions on A, and the norm estimate • R(λ, A) ≤

M Re λ−w ,

Re λ > w,

proved in Theorem 1.10.(iii) may serve for this purpose. To tackle the above problem, it is helpful to recall the results from the introduction and to think of the semigroup generated by an operator A as an “exponential function” t → etA . 3.3 Exponential Formulas. We pursue this idea by recalling the various ways by which we can define “exponential functions.” Each of these formulas and each method is then checked for a possible generalization to infinite-dimensional Banach spaces and, in particular, to unbounded operators. Here are some more or less promising formulas for “etA .” Formula (i) As in the matrix case (see Section I.2.a) we might use the power series and define (3.1)

etA :=

∞ n t n A . n! n=0

Comment. For unbounded A, it is unrealistic to expect convergence of this series. In fact, there exist strongly continuous semigroups such that for its generator A the series ∞ n t n A x n! n=0 converges only for t = 0 or x = 0. See Exercise 3.12.(2).


65

Formula (ii) We might use the Cauchy integral formula and define 1 eλt R(λ, A) dλ. (3.2) etA := 2πi +∂U Comment. As already noted, the generator A, hence also its spectrum σ(A), may be unbounded. Therefore, the path +∂U surrounding σ(A) will be unbounded, and so we need extra conditions to make the integral converge. See Section 4 for a class of semigroups for which this approach does work. Formula (iii) At least in the one-dimensional case, the formulas

etA = lim

n→∞

n

1+

t A n

= lim

n→∞

1−

t A n

−n

are well known (indeed Euler already used them; see [EN00, Sect. VII.3]). Comment. Whereas the first formula again involves powers of the unbounded operator A and therefore will rarely converge, we can rewrite the second (using the resolvent operators R(λ, A) := (λ − A)−1 ) as % & (3.3) etA = lim n/tR ( n/t, A) n . n→∞

This yields a formula involving only powers of bounded operators. It was Hille’s idea (in 1948) to use this formula and to prove that under appropriate conditions, the limit exists and defines a strongly continuous semigroup. We return to this idea later (see Corollary IV.2.5 below). Formula (iv) Because it is well understood how to define the exponential function for bounded operators (see Section I.2.b), one can try to approximate A by a sequence (An )n∈N of bounded operators and hope that (3.4)

etA := lim etAn n→∞

exists and is a strongly continuous semigroup. Comment. This was Yosida’s idea (also in 1948) and is now examined in detail in order to obtain strongly continuous semigroups. We start with an important convergence property for the resolvent under the assumption that λR(λ, A) remains bounded as λ → ∞. 3.4 Lemma. Let A, D(A) be a closed, densely defined operator. Suppose there exist w ∈ R and M > 0 such that [w, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A) and λR(λ, A) ≤ M for all λ ≥ w. Then the following convergence statements hold for λ → ∞. (i) λR(λ, A)x → x for all x ∈ X. (ii) λAR(λ, A)x = λR(λ, A)Ax → Ax for all x ∈ D(A).

66


Proof. If y ∈ D(A), then λR(λ, A)y = R(λ, A)Ay + y by (1.1) in Chapter V. This expression converges to y as λ → ∞, because R(λ, A)Ay ≤ M/λ Ay . Because λR(λ, A) is uniformly bounded for all λ ≥ w, statement (i) follows by Proposition A.3. The second statement is then an immediate consequence of the first one. This lemma suggests immediately which bounded operators An should be chosen to approximate the unbounded operator A. Because for contraction semigroups the technical details of the subsequent proof become much easier (and because the general case can then be deduced from this one), we first give the characterization theorem for generators in this special case. 3.5 Generation Theorem. (Contraction Case, Hille, Yosida, 1948). For a linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X, the following properties are all equivalent. (a) A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous contraction semigroup. (b) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ > 0 one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.5)

λR(λ, A) ≤ 1.

(c) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ C with Re λ > 0 one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.6)

R(λ, A) ≤

1 . Re λ

Proof. In view of Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 1.10, it suffices to show (b) ⇒ (a). To that purpose, we define the so-called Yosida approximants (3.7)

An := nAR(n, A) = n2 R(n, A) − nI,

n ∈ N,

which are bounded, mutually commuting operators for each n ∈ N. Consider then the uniformly continuous semigroups given by (3.8)

Tn (t) := etAn ,

t ≥ 0.

Because An converges to A pointwise on D(A) (by Lemma 3.4.(ii)), we anticipate that the following properties hold. (i) T (t)x := limn→∞ Tn (t)x exists for each x ∈ X. (ii) T (t) t≥0 is a strongly continuous contraction semigroup on X. (iii) This semigroup has generator A, D(A) . By establishing these statements we complete the proof.


67

(i) Each Tn (t) t≥0 is a contraction semigroup, because Tn (t) ≤ e−nt e n

2

R(n,A) t

≤ e−nt ent = 1

for t ≥ 0.

So, again by Proposition A.3, it suffices to prove convergence just on D(A). By (the vector-valued version of) the fundamental theorem of calculus, applied to the functions s → Tm (t − s)Tn (s)x for 0 ≤ s ≤ t, x ∈ D(A), and m, n ∈ N, and using the mutual commutativity of the semigroups Tn (t) t≥0 for all n ∈ N, one has

t

Tn (t)x − Tm (t)x =

d ds

0

Tm (t − s)Tn (s)x ds

t

Tm (t − s)Tn (s)(An x − Am x) ds.

= 0

Accordingly, (3.9)

Tn (t)x − Tm (t)x ≤ t An x − Am x .

By Lemma 3.4.(ii), (An x)n∈N is a Cauchy sequence for each x ∈ D(A). Therefore, Tn (t)x n∈N converges for each x ∈ D(A), hence for each x ∈ X and even uniformly on each interval [0, t0 ]. (ii) The pointwise convergence of Tn (t)x n∈N implies that the limit family T (t) t≥0 satisfies the functional equation (FE), hence is a semigroup, and consists of contractions. Moreover, for each x ∈ D(A), the corresponding orbit map ξ : t → T (t)x, 0 ≤ t ≤ t0 , is the uniform limit of continuous functions (use (3.9)) and so is continuous itself. This suffices to obtain strong continuityvia Proposition I.1.3. (iii) Denote by B, D(B) the generator of T (t) t≥0 and fix x ∈ D(A). On each compact interval [0, t0 ], the functions ξn : t → Tn (t)x converge uniformly to ξ(·) by (3.9), and the differentiated functions ξ˙n : t → Tn (t)An x converge uniformly to η : t → T (t)Ax. ˙ This implies differentiability of ξ with ξ(0) = η(0); i.e., D(A) ⊂ D(B) and Ax = Bx for x ∈ D(A).

68


Now choose λ > 0. Then λ − A is a bijection from D(A) onto X, because λ ∈ ρ(A) by assumption. On the other hand, B generates a contraction semigroup, and so λ ∈ ρ(B) by Theorem 1.10. Hence, λ − B is also a bijection from D(B) onto X. But we have seen that λ − B coincides with λ − A on D(A). This is possible only if D(A) = D(B) and A = B. If a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A satisfies, for some w ∈ R, an estimate T (t) ≤ ewt

for t ≥ 0,

then we can apply the above characterization to the rescaled contraction semigroup given by S(t) := e−wt T (t)

for t ≥ 0.

Because the generator of S(t) t≥0 is B = A − w (see Paragraph 2.2), Generation Theorem 3.5 takes the following form. 3.6 Corollary. Let w ∈ R. For a linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X the following conditions are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfying (3.10)

T (t) ≤ ewt

for t ≥ 0.

(b) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for each λ > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.11)

(λ − w)R(λ, A) ≤ 1.

(c) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for each λ ∈ C with Re λ > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.12)

R(λ, A) ≤

1 . Re λ − w

Semigroups satisfying (3.10) are also called quasi-contractive. Note, by Paragraph 3.11 below, that an operator A generates a strongly continuous group if and only if both A and −A are generators. Therefore, we can combine the conditions of the Generation Theorem 3.5 for A and −A simultaneously and obtain a characterization of generators of contraction groups, i.e., of groups of isometries.


69

3.7 Corollary. For a linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X the following properties are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous group of isometries. (b) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ R \ {0} one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.13)

λR(λ, A) ≤ 1.

(c) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ C \ iR one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.14)

R(λ, A) ≤

1 . | Re λ|

It is now a pleasant surprise that the characterization of generators of arbitrary strongly continuous semigroups can be deduced from the above result for contraction semigroups. However, norm estimates for all powers of the resolvent are needed. 3.8 Generation Theorem. (General Case, Feller, Miyadera, Phillips, 1952). Let A, D(A) be a linear operator on a Banach space X and let w ∈ R, M ≥ 1 be constants. Then the following properties are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfying (3.15)

T (t) ≤ M ewt

for t ≥ 0.

(b) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.16)

% & (λ − w)R(λ, A) n ≤ M

for all n ∈ N.

(c) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ C with Re λ > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.17)

R(λ, A)n ≤

M (Re λ − w)n

for all n ∈ N.

70


Proof. The implication (a) ⇒ (c) has been proved in Corollary 1.11, and (c) ⇒ (b) is trivial. To prove (b) ⇒ (a) we use, as for Corollary 3.6, the rescaling technique from Paragraph 2.2. So, without loss of generality, we assume that w = 0; i.e., λn R(λ, A)n ≤ M

for all λ > 0, n ∈ N.

For every µ > 0, define a new norm on X by x µ := sup µn R(µ, A)n x . n≥0

These norms have the following properties. (i) x ≤ x µ ≤ M x ; i.e., they are all equivalent to · . (ii) µR(µ, A) µ ≤ 1. (iii) λR(λ, A) µ ≤ 1 for all 0 < λ ≤ µ. (iv) λn R(λ, A)n x ≤ λn R(λ, A)n x µ ≤ x µ for all 0 < λ ≤ µ and n ∈ N. (v) x λ ≤ x µ for 0 < λ ≤ µ. We only give the proof of (iii). Due to the Resolvent Equation in Paragraph V.1.2, we have that y := R(λ, A)x = R(µ, A)x+(µ−λ)R(µ, A)R(λ, A)x = R(µ, A)(x+(µ−λ)y). This implies, by using (ii), that y µ ≤

1 µ−λ x µ + y µ , µ µ

whence

λ y µ ≤ x µ .

On the basis of these properties one can define still another norm by (3.18)

[]x[] := sup x µ , µ>0

which evidently satisfies (vi) x ≤ []x[] ≤ M x and (vii) []λR(λ, A)[] ≤ 1 for all λ > 0. Thus, the operator A, D(A) satisfies Condition (3.5) for the equivalent norm []·[] and so, by the Generation Theorem 3.5, generates a []·[]-contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Using (vi) again, we obtain T (t) ≤ M.


71

3.9 Comment. As a general rule, we point out that for an operator A, D(A) to be a generator one needs • Conditions on the location of the spectrum σ(A) in some left half-plane and • Growth estimates of the form R(λ, A)n ≤

M (Re λ − w)n

for all powers of the resolvent R(λ, A) in some right half-plane (or on some semiaxis (w, ∞)). See Exercise 3.12.(3) for an example that the estimate with n = 1 does not suffice. This last condition is rather complicated and can be checked for nontrivial examples only in the (quasi) contraction case, i.e., only if n = 1 is sufficient as in Generation Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.6. On the other hand, every strongly continuous semigroup can be rescaled (see Paragraph I.1.10) to become bounded. For a bounded semigroup, we can find an equivalent norm making it a contraction semigroup. This does not help much in concrete examples, because only in rare cases will it be possible to compute this new norm. However, this fact is extremely helpful in abstract considerations and is stated explicitly. 3.10 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be a bounded, strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X. Then the norm |||x||| := sup T (t)x ,

x ∈ X,

t≥0

is equivalent to theoriginal norm on X, and T (t) t≥0 becomes a contraction semigroup on X, |||·||| . The proof is left as Exercise 3.12.(1). 3.11 Generators of Groups. This paragraph is devoted to the question of which operators are generators of strongly continuous groups (see the explanation following Definition I.1.1). In order to make this more precise we first adapt Definition 1.2 to this situation. Definition. The generator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X of a strongly continuous group T (t) t∈R on a Banach space X is the operator Ax := lim h1 T (h)x − x h→0

defined for every x in its domain D(A) := x ∈ X : lim

1 h→0 h

T (h)x − x exists .

72


Given a strongly continuous group T (t) t∈R with generator A, D(A) , we can define T+ (t) := T (t) and T−(t) :=T (−t) for t ≥ 0. Then, from the previous definition, it is clear that T+ (t) t≥0 and T− (t) t≥0 are strongly continuous semigroups with generators A and −A, respectively. Therefore, if A is the generator of a group, then both A and −A generate strongly continuous semigroups. The next result shows that the converse of this statement is also true. Generation Theorem for Groups. Let w ∈ R and M ≥ 1 be constants. For a linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X the following properties are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous group T (t) t∈R satisfying the growth estimate T (t) ≤ M ew|t|

for t ∈ R.

(b) A, D(A) and D(A) are thegenerators of strongly continuous −A, semigroups T+ (t) t≥0 and T− (t) t≥0 , respectively, which satisfy T+ (t) , T− (t) ≤ M ewt

for all t ≥ 0.

(c) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ R with |λ| > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and % & (|λ| − w)R(λ, A) n ≤ M

for all n ∈ N.

(d) A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and for every λ ∈ C with | Re λ| > w one has λ ∈ ρ(A) and (3.19)

R(λ, A)n ≤

M | Re λ| − w n

for all n ∈ N.

Proof. (a) implies (b) as already mentioned above. (b) ⇒ (d). We first recall, by Theorem 1.4, that the generator A, D(A) is closed and densely defined. Moreover, using the assumptions on A, we obtain from Generation Theorem 3.8 the estimate (3.19) for the case Re λ > w. In order to verify (3.19) for Re λ < −w, observe that R(−λ, A) = −R(λ, −A) for all λ ∈ −ρ(A) = ρ(−A). Then, using the conditions on −A, the required estimate follows as above. Because the implication (d) ⇒ (c) is trivial, it suffices to prove that (c) ⇒ (a). To this end we first note, by Generation Theorem 3.8, that both A and T+ (t) t≥0 −A are generators of strongly continuous semigroups and T− (t) t≥0 , respectively, which satisfy T± (t) ≤ M ewt for t ≥ 0. Moreover, the Yosida approximants (cf. (3.7)) A+,n and A−,n of A and


73

−A, respectively, commute. Because as in the contractive case (cf. (i)–(iii) in the proof of Generation Theorem 3.5, p. 66), we have T+ (t)x = lim exp(tA+,n )x n→∞

and

T− (t)x = lim exp(tA−,n )x n→∞

for all x ∈ X, we see that T+ (t) t≥0 and T− (t) t≥0 commute. Hence, by what was shown in Paragraph 2.6, the products

U (t) := T+ (t)T− (t),

t ≥ 0,

define a strongly continuous semigroup with generator C that satisfies Cx = Ax − Ax = 0 for all x ∈ D(A) ∩ D(−A) = D(A) ⊂ D(C). From (1.6) in Lemma 1.3 we then obtain U (t)x = x for all x ∈ X; i.e., T− (t) = T+ (t)−1 . Finally, the operators if t ≥ 0, T+ (t) T (t) := T− (−t) if t < 0, form a one-parameter group T (t) t∈R and satisfy the estimate T (t) ≤ M ew|t| . Because the map R t → T (t) is strongly continuous if and only if it is strongly continuous at some arbitrary point t0 ∈ R, the group T (t) t∈R is strongly continuous. This completes the proof. The following result is quite useful in order to check whether a given semigroup can be embedded in a group. Proposition. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X. If there exists some t0 > 0 such that T (t0 ) is invertible, then T (t) t≥0 can be embedded in a group T (t) t∈R on X. Proof. First, we show that T (t) is invertible for all t ≥ 0. This follows for t ∈ [0, t0 ] from T (t0 ) = T (t0 − t)T (t) = T (t)T (t0 − t), because by assumption, T (t0 ) is bijective. If t ≥ t0 , we write t = nt0 + s for n ∈ N, s ∈ [0, t0 ) and conclude from T (t) = T (t0 )n T (s) that T (t) is invertible. Hence, we can extend T (t) t≥0 to all of R by for t ≤ 0, T (t) := T (−t)−1 thereby obtaining a group T (t) t∈R . Because the map R t → T (t) is strongly continuous if and only if it is strongly continuous at some arbitrary point, the proof is complete.

74


3.12 Exercises. (1) Prove Lemma 3.10 dealing with the renorming of bounded semigroups. (2) For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A on a Banach space X, we call a vector x ∈ D(A∞ ) entire if the power series (3.20)

∞ n t n A x n! n=0

converges for every t ∈ R. Show the following properties. (i) If x is an entire vector of T (t) t≥0 , then T (t)x is given by (3.20) for every t ≥ 0. (ii) If T (t) t≥0 is nilpotent, then the set of entire vectors consists of x = 0 only. (iii) If T (t) t∈R is a strongly continuous group, then the set of entire vectors is dense in X. Moreover, if x is an entire vector of T (t) t∈R , then T (t)x is given by (i) for every t ∈ R. (Hint: For given x ∈ X ∞ −ns2/ 1 2 T (s)x ds. See also consider the sequence xn := ( n/2π) /2 −∞ e [Gel39].) (3) Let Mq be a multiplication operator on X := C0 (R+ ) and define the q operator A := M0q M with domain D(A) := D(Mq ) × D(Mq ) on X := Mq X × X. (i) If q(s) := is, s ≥ 0, then A satisfies R(λ, A) ≤ 2/λ for λ > 0, but is not the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup on X. (ii) Find an unbounded function q on R+ such that A becomes a generator. (iii) Find necessary and sufficient conditions on q such that A becomes a generator on X. (Hint: Compare Exercise 4.14.(7).) (4) Let T (t) t≥0 space be a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach X. Show that T (t) t≥0 can be embedded in a group T (t) t∈R if there exists t0 > 0 such that I − T (t0 ) is compact. (Hint: By the proposition in Paragraph 3.11 and the compactness assumption, it suffices to show that 0 is not an eigenvalue of T (t0 ).)

b. The Lumer–Phillips Theorem Due to their importance, we now return to the study of contraction semigroups and look for a characterization of their generator that does not require explicit knowledge of the resolvent. The following is a key notion towards this goal.


75

3.13 Definition. A linear operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X is called dissipative if (3.21)

(λ − A)x ≥ λ x

for all λ > 0 and x ∈ D(A). To familiarize ourselves with these operators we state some of their basic properties. 3.14 Proposition. For a dissipative operator A, D(A) the following properties hold. (i) λ − A is injective for all λ > 0 and (λ − A)−1 z ≤ 1 z λ for all z in the range rg(λ − A) := (λ − A)D(A). (ii) λ − A is surjective for some λ > 0 if and only if it is surjective for each λ > 0. In that case, one has (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A). (iii) A is closed if and only if the range rg(λ−A) is closed for some (hence all) λ > 0. (iv) If rg(A) ⊆ D(A), e.g., if A is densely defined, then A is closable. Its closure A is again dissipative and satisfies rg(λ − A) = rg(λ − A) for all λ > 0. Proof. (i) is just a reformulation of estimate (3.21). To show (ii) we assume that (λ0 − A) is surjective for some λ0 > 0. In combination with (i), this yields λ0 ∈ ρ(A) and R(λ0 , A) ≤ 1/λ0 . The series expansion for the resolvent (see Proposition V.1.3.(i)) yields (0, 2λ0 ) ⊂ ρ(A), and the dissipativity of A implies that R(λ, A) ≤

1 λ

for 0 < λ < 2λ0 . Proceeding in this way, we see that λ − A is surjective for all λ > 0, and therefore (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A). (iii) The operator A is closed if and only if λ−A is closed for some (hence all) λ > 0. This is again equivalent to (λ − A)−1 : rg(λ − A) → D(A) being closed. By (i), this operator is bounded. Hence, by Theorem A.10, it is closed if and only if its domain, i.e., rg(λ − A), is closed.

76


(iv) Take a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) satisfying xn → 0 and Axn → y. By Proposition A.8, we have to show that y = 0. The inequality (3.21) implies that λ(λ − A)xn + (λ − A)w ≥ λ λxn + w for every w ∈ D(A) and all λ > 0. Passing to the limit as n → ∞ yields −λy + (λ − A)w ≥ λ w ,

1 and hence −y + w − Aw ≥ w . λ

For λ → ∞ we obtain that −y + w ≥ w , and by choosing w from the domain D(A) arbitrarily close to y ∈ rg(A), we see that 0 ≥ y . Hence y = 0. In order to verify that A is dissipative, take x ∈ D A . By definition of the closure of a linear operator, there exists a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) satisfying xn → x and Axn → Ax when n → ∞. Because A is dissipative and the norm is continuous, this implies that (λ − A)x ≥ λ x for all λ > 0. Hence rg(λ − A) is A is dissipative. Finally, observe that the range dense in rg λ − A . Because by assertion (iii) rg λ − A is closed in X, we obtain the final assertion in (iv). From the resolvent estimate (3.5) in Generation Theorem 3.5, it is evident that the generator of a contraction semigroup satisfies the estimate (3.21), and hence is dissipative. On the other hand, many operators can be shown directly to be dissipative and densely defined. We therefore reformulate Generation Theorem 3.5 in such a way as to single out the property that ensures that a densely defined, dissipative operator is a generator. 3.15 Theorem. (Lumer, Phillips, 1961). For a densely defined, dissipative operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X the following statements are equivalent. (a) The closure A of A generates a contraction semigroup. (b) rg(λ − A) is dense in X for some (hence all) λ > 0. Proof. (a) ⇒ (b). Generation Theorem 3.5 implies that rg(λ − A) = X for all λ > 0. Because rg(λ − A) = rg(λ − A), by Proposition 3.14.(iv), we obtain (b).


77

(b) ⇒ (a). By the same argument, the density of the range rg(λ − A) implies that (λ − A) is surjective. Proposition 3.14.(ii) shows that (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A), and dissipativity of A implies the estimate R(λ, A) ≤ 1 λ

for λ > 0.

This was required in Generation Theorem 3.5 to assure that A generated a contraction semigroup. The above theorem gains its significance when viewed in the context of the abstract Cauchy problem associated with an operator A (see Section 6). 3.16 Remark. Assume that the operator A is known to be closed, densely defined, and dissipative. Then Theorem 3.15 in combination with Proposition 6.2 below yields the following fact. In order to solve the (time-dependent) initial value problem (ACP)

x(t) ˙ = Ax(t), x(0) = x

for all x ∈ D(A), it is sufficient to solve the (stationary) resolvent equation x − Ax = y

(RE)

for all y in some dense subset in the Banach space X. In many examples (RE) can be solved explicitly whereas (ACP) cannot, cf. Paragraph 3.29 or [EN00, Sect. VI.6]. The following result, in combination with the characterization of dissipativity in Proposition 3.23 below, gives an even simpler condition for an operator to generate a contraction semigroup. 3.17 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be a densely defined operator on a Banach space X. If both A and its adjoint A are dissipative, then the closure A of A generates a contraction semigroup on X. Proof. By the Lumer–Phillips Theorem 3.15, it suffices to show that the range rg(I − A) is dense in X. By way of contradiction, assume that rg(I − A) = X. By the Hahn–Banach theorem there exists 0 = x ∈ X such that ! for all x ∈ D(A). (I − A)x, x = 0 It follows that x ∈ D(A ) and

! x, (I − A )x = 0

for all x ∈ D(A).

Because D(A) is dense in X, we conclude that (I − A )x = 0, thereby contradicting Proposition 3.14.(i).

78


At this point we insert various considerations concerning the density of the domain, which up to now was a more or less standard assumption in our results. In the next two corollaries we show how dissipativity can be used to get around this hypothesis. However, based on the properties stated in Proposition 3.14, we assume that the dissipative operator A is such that λ − A is surjective for some λ > 0. Hence (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A). 3.18 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be a dissipative operator on the Banach space X such that λ − A is surjective for some λ > 0. Then the part A| of A in the subspace X0 := D(A) is densely defined and generates a contraction semigroup in X0 . Proof. We recall from Definition 2.3 that A| x := Ax for x ∈ D(A| ) := {x ∈ D(A) : Ax ∈ X0 } = R(λ, A)X0 . Because R(λ, A) exists for λ > 0, this implies that R(λ, A)| = R(λ, A| ). Hence (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A| ). Due to the Generation Theorem 3.5, it remains to show that D(A| ) is dense in X0 . Take x ∈ D(A) and set xn := nR(n, A)x. Then xn ∈ D(A) and limn→∞ xn = limn→∞ R(n, A)Ax + x = x, because R(n, A) ≤ 1/n (see Proposition 3.14.(i) and Lemma 3.4). Therefore, the operators nR(n, A) converge pointwise on D(A) to the identity. Because nR(n, A) ≤ 1 for all n ∈ N, we obtain convergence of yn := nR(n, A)y → y for all y ∈ X0 . Because each yn is in D(A| ), the density of D(A| ) in X0 is proved. We now give two rather typical examples for dissipative operators with nondense domains, one concrete and one abstract. 3.19 Examples. (i) Let X := C[0, 1] and consider the operator with domain

Af := −f D(A) := f ∈ C1 [0, 1] : f (0) = 0 .

It is a closed operator whose domain is not dense. However, it is dissipative, because its resolvent can be computed explicitly as t R(λ, A)f (t) := e−λ(t−s) f (s) ds 0

for t ∈ [0, 1], f ∈ C[0, 1]. Moreover, R(λ, A) ≤

1 λ

for all λ > 0. Therefore, A, D(A) is dissipative.


79

Let X0 := D(A) = {f ∈ C[0, 1] : f (0) = 0}, and consider the part A| of A in X0 ; i.e., A| f = −f , D(A| ) = f ∈ C1 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (0) = 0 . By the above corollary, this operator generates a semigroup on X0 . In fact, this semigroup T0 (t) t≥0 can be identified as the nilpotent right translation semigroup (cf. Paragraph I.3.17) given by T0 (t)f (s) :=

f (s − t) for t ≤ s, 0 for t > s.

Observe that the same definition applied to an arbitrary function f ∈ C[0, 1] does not necessarily yield a continuous function again. Therefore, the semigroup T0 (t) t≥0 does not extend to the space C[0, 1]. (ii) Consider a strongly continuous contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X. Its generator A is dissipative with (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A). The same holds for its adjoint A , because R(λ, A ) = R(λ, A) and R(λ, A ) = R(λ, A) for all λ > 0. The domain D(A ) of the adjoint is not dense in X in general (see the example in [EN00, Sect. II.2.6]). However, taking the part of A in X := D(A ) ⊂ X , we obtain the generator of a contraction semigroup (given by the restrictions of T (t) to X ; see [EN00, Sect. II.2.6] on so-called sun dual semigroups). In the next corollary we show that the phenomenon discussed in Corollary 3.18 and Example 3.19 cannot occur in reflexive Banach spaces. 3.20 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be a dissipative operator on a reflexive Banach space such that λ − A is surjective for some λ > 0. Then A is densely defined and generates a contraction semigroup. Proof. We only have to show the density of D(A). Take x ∈ X and define xn := nR(n, A)x ∈ D(A). The element y := R(1, A)x also belongs to D(A). Moreover, by the proof of Corollary 3.18 the operators nR(n, A) converge towards the identity pointwise on X0 := D(A). It follows that yn := R(1, A)xn = nR(n, A)R(1, A)x → y

for n → ∞.

Because X is reflexive and {xn : n ∈ N} is bounded, there exists a subsequence, still denoted by (xn )n∈N , that converges weakly to some z ∈ X. Because xn ∈ D(A), Proposition A.1.(i) implies that z ∈ D(A). On the other hand, the elements xn = (1 − A)yn converge weakly to z, so the weak closedness of A (see Definition A.5) implies that y ∈ D(A) and x = (1 − A)y = z ∈ D(A).

80


In Corollary 3.18 and Corollary 3.20, we considered not necessarily densely defined operators and showed that dissipativity and the range condition rg(λ − A) = X for some λ > 0 imply certain generation properties. It is now a direct consequence of the renorming trick used in the proof of Generation Theorem 3.8 that these results also hold for all operators satisfying the Hille–Yosida resolvent estimates (3.16). We state this extension of Generation Theorem 3.8. 3.21 Corollary. Let w ∈ R and A, D(A) be an operator on a Banach space X. Suppose that (w, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A) and (3.22)

R(λ, A)n ≤

M (λ − w)n

for all n ∈ N, λ > w and some M ≥ 1. Then the part A| of A in X0 := D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup T0 (t) t≥0 satisfying T0 (t) ≤ M ewt for all t ≥ 0. If in addition the Banach space X is reflexive, then X0 = X. Proof. As in many previous cases we may assume that w = 0. Then the renorming procedure (3.18) from the proof of the implication (b) ⇒ (a) in Generation Theorem 3.8 yields an equivalent norm for which A is a dissipative operator. The assertions then follow from Corollary 3.18 (after returning to the original norm) and, in the reflexive case, from Corollary 3.20. It is sometimes convenient to use the following terminology. 3.22 Definition. Operators satisfying the assumptions of Corollary 3.21 and, in particular, the resolvent estimate (3.22) are called Hille–Yosida operators. Observe that Corollary 3.21 states that Hille–Yosida operators satisfy all assumptions of the Hille–Yosida Generation Theorem 3.8 on the closure of their domains. We now return to dissipative operators, which represent, up to renorming, the most general case. When introducing them we had aimed for an easy (or at least more direct) way to characterizing generators. However, up to now, the only way to arrive at the norm inequality (3.21) was explicit computation of the resolvent and then deducing the norm estimate R(λ, A) ≤

1 λ

for λ > 0.

This was done in Example 3.19.(i). Fortunately, there is a simpler method that works particularly well in concrete function spaces such as C0 (Ω) or Lp (µ).


81

To introduce this method we start with a Banach space X and its dual space X . By the Hahn–Banach theorem, for every x ∈ X there exists x ∈ X such that 2 x, x = x = x 2 . Hence, for every x ∈ X the following set, called its duality set,

2 (3.23) J(x) := x ∈ X : x, x = x = x 2 , is nonempty. Such sets allow a new characterization of dissipativity. 3.23 Proposition. An operator A, D(A) is dissipative if and only if for every x ∈ D(A) there exists j(x) ∈ J(x) such that Re Ax, j(x) ≤ 0.

(3.24)

If A is the generator of a strongly continuous contraction semigroup, then (3.24) holds for all x ∈ D(A) and arbitrary x ∈ J(x). Proof. Assume (3.24) is satisfied for x ∈ D(A), x = 1, and some j(x) ∈ 2 J(x). Then x, j(x) = j(x) = 1 and λx − Ax ≥ | λx − Ax, j(x) | ≥ Re λx − Ax, j(x) ≥ λ for all λ > 0. This proves one implication. To show the converse, we take x ∈ D(A), x = 1, and assume that λx − Ax ≥ λ for all λ > 0. Choose yλ ∈ J(λx − Ax) and consider the normalized elements y zλ := λ . yλ Then the inequalities λ ≤ λx − Ax = λx − Ax, zλ = λ Re x, zλ − Re Ax, zλ ≤ min λ − Re Ax, zλ , λ Re x, zλ + Ax are valid for each λ > 0. This yields Re Ax, zλ ≤ 0

and

1−

1 Ax ≤ Re x, zλ . λ

Let z be a weak∗ accumulation point of zλ as λ → ∞. Then z ≤ 1,

Re Ax, z ≤ 0,

and

Re x, z ≥ 1.

Combining these facts, it follows that z belongs to J(x) and satisfies (3.24).

82


Finally, assume that A generates a contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X. Then, for every x ∈ D(A) and arbitrary x ∈ J(x), we have Re T (h)x, x Re x, x Re Ax, x = lim − h↓0 h h T (h)x · x x 2 ≤ lim − ≤ 0. h↓0 h h

This completes the proof.

Using the previous results we easily arrive at the following characterization of unitary groups on Hilbert spaces. Its discovery by Stone was one of the major steps towards the construction of the exponential function in infinite dimensions, hence towards the solution of Problem I.2.13; cf. [EN00, Chap. VII]. 3.24 Theorem. (Stone, 1932). Let A, D(A) be a densely defined operator on a Hilbert space H. Then A generates a unitary group T (t) t∈R on H if and only if A is skew-adjoint; i.e., A∗ = −A. Proof. First, assume that A generates a unitary group T (t) t∈R . By Paragraph 3.11, we have T (t)∗ = T (t)−1 = T (−t)

for all t ∈ R.

Moreover, by Paragraphs I.1.13 and 2.5 on adjoint semigroups, the generator of T (t)∗ t∈R is given by A∗ . This implies that A∗ = −A. On the other hand, if A∗ = −A, then we conclude from (Ax | x) = (x | A∗ x) = −(x | Ax) = −(Ax | x)

for all x ∈ D(A) = D(A∗ )

that (Ax | x) ∈ iR. Combining Proposition 3.23 with the identification of the duality set as J(x) = {x} (see Exercise 3.25.(i) below), this shows that both ±A are dissipative and closed. From Corollary 3.17 and the characterization of group generators in Paragraph 3.11, it follows that the operator A generates a contraction group T (t) t∈R . Because T (t)−1 = T (−t), we conclude that each T (t) is a surjective isometry and therefore unitary (see [Ped89, Sect. 3.2.15]). 3.25 Exercise. Prove the following statements for a Hilbert space H. (i) For every x ∈ H, one has J(x) = {x}. (ii) If A is a normal operator on H, then A is a generator of a strongly continuous semigroup if and only if s(A) < ∞. (iii) Prove Stone’s theorem by arguing via multiplication semigroups. (Hint: For (ii) and (iii) use the Spectral Theorem I.3.9 and the results of Paragraph 3.11.)


83

c. More Examples We close this section with a discussion of all of these notions and results for concrete examples. We begin by identifying the sets J(x) for some standard function spaces. 3.26 Examples. (i) Consider X := C0 (Ω), Ω locally compact. For 0 = f ∈ X, the set J(f ) ⊂ X contains (multiples of) all point measures supported by those points s0 ∈ Ω where |f | reaches its maximum. More precisely,

(3.25) f (s0 ) · δs0 : s0 ∈ Ω and |f (s0 )| = f ⊂ J(f ). (ii) Let X := Lp (Ω, µ) for 1 ≤ p < ∞, and 0 = f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ). Then ϕ ∈ J(f ) ⊂ Lq (Ω, µ), 1/p + 1/q = 1, where ϕ is defined by p−2 · f 2−p if f (s) = 0, (3.26) ϕ(s) := f (s) · |f (s)| 0 otherwise. p Note that for the reflexive L -spaces, as for every Banach space with a strictly convex dual, the sets J(f ) are singletons (see [Bea82]). Hence, for 1 < p < ∞, one has J(f ) = {ϕ}, whereas for p = 1 every function ϕ ∈ L∞ (Ω, µ) satisfying (3.27)

ϕ ∞ ≤ f 1

and

ϕ(s) |f (s)| = f (s) f 1

if f (s) = 0

belongs to J(f ). (iii) It is easy, but important, to state the result for Hilbert spaces H. After the canonical identification of H with its dual H , the duality set of x ∈ H is (3.28)

J(x) = {x};

cf. Exercise 3.25.(i). Hence, a linear operator on H is dissipative if and only if (3.29)

Re(Ax | x) ≤ 0

for all x ∈ D(A). These examples suggest that dissipativity for concrete operators on such function spaces can be verified via the inequality (3.24). In the following examples we do this and establish the dissipativity and generation property for various operators. We start with a concrete version of Theorem 3.24. 3.27 Example. (Self-Adjoint Operators). Consider on the Hilbert space H := L2 (Ω, µ) the multiplication operator A := Mq for some (measurable) function q : Ω → C. Because its adjoint is A∗ = Mq , this operator is selfadjoint if and only if q is real-valued. In this case, it follows by Theorem 3.24 that the group Tiq (t) t∈R generated by Miq is unitary.

84


However, this can be seen more directly by inspection of the corresponding multiplication group Tiq (t) t∈R , for which we have Tiq (t)∗ = Tiq (t) = T−iq (t) = Tiq (−t)

for all t ∈ R.

It is this argument for multiplication operators and semigroups that can be used to give a simple proof of Stone’s Theorem 3.24. In fact, an application of the Spectral Theorem I.3.9 transforms the unitary group T (t) t∈R and its (skew-adjoint) generator A on an arbitrary Hilbert space into multiplication operators on some L2 -space. See Exercise 3.25.(iii). The same argument, i.e., passing from a self-adjoint operator to a (realvalued) multiplication operator, yields the following characterization of selfadjoint semigroups. Proposition. A self-adjoint operator A, D(A) on a Hilbert space H generates a strongly continuous semigroup (of self-adjoint operators) if and only if it is bounded above; i.e., there exists w ∈ R such that (Ax | x) ≤ w x

2

for all x ∈ D(A).

Proof. It suffices to consider the multiplication operator Mq that is isomorphic, via the Spectral Theorem I.3.9, to A. Then the boundedness con2 dition (Ax | x) ≤ w x for all x ∈ D(A) means that the real-valued function q satisfies ess sup Re q(s) ≤ w. s∈Ω

This, however, is exactly what is needed for Mq to generate a semigroup (see Propositions I.3.11 and I.3.12). 3.28 First-Order Differential Operators and Flows. We begin by considering a continuously differentiable vector field F : Rn → Rn satisfying the estimate sups∈Rn DF (s) < ∞ for the derivative DF (s) of F at s ∈ R. With this vector field we associate the following operator on the space X := C0 (Rn ). Definition 1. The first-order differential operator on C0 (Rn ) corresponding to the vector field F : Rn → Rn is Af (s) : = grad f (s), F (s) n ∂f = Fi (s) (s) ∂s i i=1 for f ∈ C1c (Rn ) := {f ∈ C1 (Rn ) : f has compact support} and s ∈ Rn . Using Example 3.26.(i) and the fact that ∂f (s0 )/∂si = 0 if |f (s0 )| = f , it is immediate that A is dissipative. However, in order to show that the closure of A is a generator, there is a natural and explicit choice for what the semigroup generated by A should be. By writing it down, one simply checks that its generator is the closure of A.


85

Because F is globally Lipschitz, it follows from standard results on ordin nary differential equations that there exists a continuous flow Φ : R×R → n R ; i.e., Φ is continuous with Φ(t + r, s) = Φ t, Φ(r, s) and Φ(0, s) = s for every r, t ∈ R and s ∈ Rn , which solves the differential equation ∂ Φ(t, s) = F Φ(t, s) ∂t for all t ∈ R, s ∈ Rn (see [Ama90, Thm. 10.3]). With such a flow we associate a one-parameter group of linear operators on C0 (Rn ) as follows. Definition 2. The group defined by the operators T (t)f (s) := f Φ(t, s) for f ∈ C0 (Rn ), s ∈ Rn , and t ∈ R, is called the group induced by the flow Φ on the Banach space C0 (Rn ). The group property and the strong continuity follow immediately from the corresponding properties of the flow; we refer to Exercise 3.31.(2) for a closer look at the relations between (nonlinear) and (linear) semiflows semigroups. We now determine the generator of T (t) t∈R . Proposition. The generator of the group T (t) t∈R on C0 (Rn ) is the closure of the first-order differential operator Af (s) := grad f (s), F (s)

with domain

D(A) := C1c (Rn ).

Proof. Let B, D(B) denote the generator of T (t) t∈R . For f ∈ C1c (Rn ) consider g := f −Af ∈ Cc (Rn ) and compute the resolvent using the integral representation (1.13) in Chapter II. This yields ∞ % & R(1, B)g (s) = e−t f Φ(t, s) dt 0 ∞ ! − e−t grad f Φ(t, s) , F Φ(t, s) dt 0

= f (s) after an integration by parts. Accordingly, C1c (Rn ) ⊂ D(B) and A ⊂ B. On hand, C1c (Rn ) is dense in C0 (Rn ) and invariant under the group the other T (t) t∈R induced by the flow. So, C1c (Rn ) is a core by Proposition 1.7, and the assertion is proved. Analogous results on first-order differential operators on bounded domains Ω ⊂ Rn need so-called boundary conditions and have been obtained, e.g., in [Ulm92]. In the next paragraph we discuss an example of such a boundary condition in a very simple situation.

86


3.29 Delay Differential Operators. On the space X := C[−1, 0], consider the operator Af := f

D(A) := f ∈ C1 [−1, 0] : f (0) = Lf ,

with domain

where L is a continuous linear form on C[−1, 0]. This can be rewritten as D(A) = ker ϕ, where ϕ is the linear form on C1 [−1, 0] defined by C1 [−1, 0] f → f (0) − Lf ∈ C. Because this functional is bounded on the Banach space C1 [−1, 0] but unbounded for the sup-norm, we deduce that D(A) is dense in C[−1, 0] and closed in C1 [−1, 0]; cf. Proposition A.9. Next, we show that the rescaled operator A− L ·I is dissipative. To this end, take f ∈ D(A). As seen in Example 3.26.(i), the linear form f (s0 ) δs0 belongs to J(f ) if |f (s0 )| = f for some s0 ∈ [−1, 0]. This means that A − L I is dissipative, provided that " # (3.30) Re f − L f, f (s0 ) δs0 ≤ 0

or

Re f (s0 )f (s0 ) ≤ L · f . 2

In the case −1 < s0 < 0 we have f (s0 ) = 0, so that (3.30) certainly holds. The same is true if s0 = −1, because then 2 Re f (−1)f (−1) = (f · f ) (−1) ≤ 0. It remains to consider the case where s0 = 0. Here, we use f (0) = Lf for f ∈ D(A) to obtain Re f (0)f (0) = Re f (0)Lf ≤ f · L · f . So, we are now well prepared to apply Theorem 3.15 to conclude that A is a generator. Proposition. Let L ∈ C[−1, 0] . The delay differential operator Af := f

with

D(A) := f ∈ C1 [−1, 0] : f (0) = Lf

on the Banach space C[−1, 0] generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfying T (t) ≤ eLt

for t ≥ 0.


87

Proof. By the rescaling technique, the assertion follows from Theorem 3.15 and the above consideration, provided that λ − A is surjective for some λ > L . This means we have to show that for every g ∈ C[−1, 0] there exists f ∈ C1 [−1, 0] satisfying both λf − f = g and

f (0) = Lf ;

i.e., f ∈ D(A).

The first equation has f (s) := c eλs −

s

eλ(s−τ ) g(τ ) dτ 0

=: c ελ (s) − h(s),

s ∈ [−1, 0],

as a solution for every constant c ∈ C. If λ > L , then we can choose this constant as g(0) − Lh c := λ − Lελ in order to obtain f ∈ D(A).

The importance (and name) of this operator stems from the fact that the semigroup it generates solves a delay differential equation of the form u(t) ˙ = Lut for t ≥ 0, u(s) = f (s) for −1 ≤ s ≤ 0, where f is an initial function from C[−1, 0]. Here, ut ∈ C[−1, 0] is defined by ut (s) := u(t + s) for s ∈ [−1, 0]. In [EN00, Sect. VI.6] and more systematically in [BP05] it is shown how these and more general equations can be solved via semigroups. 3.30 Second-Order Differential Operators. (i) We first reconsider the operator from Paragraph 2.11; i.e., we take on X := C[0, 1] the operator Af := f , D(A) := f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0 . This time, instead of constructing the generated semigroup, we verify the conditions of Theorem 3.15. It is simple to show that A, D(A) is densely defined and closed. To show dissipativity, we take f ∈ D(A) and s0 ∈ [0, 1] such that |f (s0 )| = f . By Example 3.26.(i) we have f (s0 ) δs0 ∈ J(f ). Because t → Re f (s0 ) · f (t) takes its maximum at s0 , it follows that # " Re f , f (s0 ) δs0 = Re f (s0 )f (s0 ) ≤ 0,

88


where we need to use the boundary condition f (0) = f (1) = 0 if s0 = 0 or s0 = 1. We finally show that λ2 − A is surjective for λ > 0. Take g ∈ C[0, 1] and define ' ( 1 1 1 k(s) := eλs e−λτ g(τ ) dτ − e−λs eλτ g(τ ) dτ for s ∈ [0, 1]. 2λ s s Then k is in C2 [0, 1] and satisfies λ2 k − k = g. On the other hand, for each a, b ∈ C, the function ha,b (s) := a eλs + b e−λs , satisfies

s ∈ [0, 1],

λ2 ha,b − ha,b = 0.

It is now an exercise in linear algebra to determine ) a, )b ∈ C such that the function f := k + ha˜,˜b satisfies f (0) = f (1) = 0. Then f ∈ D(A) and λ2f − f = g; i.e., λ2 − A is surjective. It follows from Theorem 3.15 that A, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup on C[0, 1]. (ii) The above method is now applied to the same differential operator on a different space and with different boundary conditions. Let X := L2 [0, 1] and Af := f , D(A) := {f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0}. Then D(A) is dense in X, and for f ∈ D(A) one has 1 1 1 (3.31) (Af | f ) = f f ds = f f − f f ds ≤ 0. 0

0

0

By Example 3.26.(iii), this means that A is dissipative on the Hilbert space L2 [0, 1]. As in the previous case, for every g ∈ C2 [0, 1] and λ > 0 there exists a function f ∈ C2 [0, 1] satisfying f (0) = f (1) = 0 and λ2 f − f = g;

i.e., rg(λ2 −A) is dense. Again by Theorem 3.15 we conclude that A, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup on L2 [0, 1]. Here the domain of the closure A is given by D(A) = H20 [0, 1]; see Exercise 3.31.(1). (iii) As a somewhat less second-order differential operator on canonical X := C[0, 1], consider A, D(A) defined by Af (s) := s(1 − s)f (s), s ∈ [0, 1], 2 for f ∈ D(A) := f ∈ C[0, 1] ∩ C (0, 1) : lims→0,1 s(1 − s)f (s) = 0 . We show that it generates a strongly continuous contraction semigroup by verifying the conditions of Theorem 3.15.


89

As above, it is easy to show that A, D(A) is closed, densely defined, and dissipative. Therefore, it suffices to prove that λ − A is surjective for some λ > 0. Observe first that the functions h0 : s → 1 and h1 : s → s belong to D(A) and satisfy (3.32)

(λ − A)hi = λhi ,

i = 0, 1 and λ > 0.

Hence, it suffices to consider the part A0 of A in the closed subspace X0 := ) := f ∈ X0 ∩ C2 (0, 1) : {f ∈ X : f (0) = f (1) = 0} with domain D(A 0 lims→0,1 s(1 − s)f (s) = 0 . Then A0 , D(A0 ) is still dissipative, but is now surjective. Its inverse R can be computed as 1 f (t) σ(s, t) Rf (s) = dt, t(1 − t) 0

where σ(s, t) :=

s(t − 1) t(s − 1)

for 0 ≤ s ≤ t ≤ 1, for 0 ≤ t ≤ s ≤ 1,

and f ∈ X0 . This shows that 0 ∈ ρ(A0 ) and hence [0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A0 ). From (3.32) we conclude that (0, ∞) ⊂ ρ(A). Accordingly, A is a generator. 3.31 Exercises. (1) Show that the domain of A in Paragraph 3.30.(ii) is given by D(A) = H20 [0, 1] := {f ∈ W2,2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0}. (Hint: Show first that the second derivative D2 on L2 [0, 1] with domain H20 [0, 1] is invertible. The assertion then follows from the fact that A ⊂ D2 .) (2) Let Ω be a compact space and take X := C(Ω). A semiflow Φ : R+ × Ω → Ω is defined by the properties Φ(t + r, s) = Φ t, Φ(r, s) , (3.33) Φ(0, s) = s for every s ∈ Ω and r, t ∈ R+ . Establish the following facts. (i) The semiflow Φ is continuous if and only if it induces a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X by the formula (3.34) T (t)f (s) := f Φ(t, s) for s ∈ Ω, t ≥ 0, f ∈ X. (ii) The generator A of T (t) t≥0 is a derivation (cf. Exercise 1.15.(5)). (iii∗ ) Every strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X that consists of algebra homomorphisms originates, via (3.34), from a continuous semiflow on Ω. (Hint: See [Nag86, B-II, Thm. 3.4].) (3) Show that the semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X := C[−1, 0] generated by the delay differential operator from Paragraph 3.29 satisfies the translation property; i.e., f (t + s) if t + s ≤ 0, (TP) T (t)f (s) = [T (t + s)f ](0) if t + s > 0, for all f ∈ X (cf. also [EN00, Thm. VI.6.2]).

90


4. Analytic Semigroups Up to now, we have classified semigroups only as being strongly continuous in the general case or being uniformly continuous as a somewhat uninteresting case. Between these two extreme cases there is room for a wide range of continuity properties; see [EN00, Sect. II.4]. Here we introduce just one more class of semigroups enjoying a rather strong regularity property. Other natural regularity properties for semigroups are discussed in Section 5 below. We start our discussion by reconsidering the exponential Formula (3.2), but now impose conditions on the operator A (and its resolvent R(λ, A)) that make the contour integrals converge even if A and σ(A) are unbounded. 4.1 Definition. A closed linear operator A, D(A) in a Banach space X is called sectorial (of angle δ) if there exists 0 < δ ≤ π/2 such that the sector

* π Σ π/2+δ := λ ∈ C : | arg λ| < + δ {0} 2 is contained in the resolvent set ρ(A), and if for each ε ∈ (0, δ) there exists Mε ≥ 1 such that (4.1)

R(λ, A) ≤

Mε |λ|

for all 0 = λ ∈ Σ π/2+δ−ε .

For densely defined sectorial operators and appropriate paths γ, the exponential function “etA ” can now be defined via the Cauchy integral formula as used in the Dunford functional calculus for bounded operators (see, e.g., [DS58, Sect. VII.3], [TL80, Sect. V.8]). 4.2 Definition. Let A, D(A) be a densely defined sectorial operator of angle δ. Define T (0) := I and operators T (z), for z ∈ Σδ , by (4.2)

1 T (z) := 2πi

eµz R(µ, A) dµ, γ

where γ is any piecewise smooth curve in Σ π/2+δ going from ∞ e−i( π to ∞ ei( /2+δ ) for some δ ∈ (| arg z|, δ).2

π/ +δ ) 2

As a first step, we need to justify this definition. In particular, we show that the essential properties of the analytic functional calculus for bounded operators (cf. Definition I.2.10) prevail in this situation. 2

See Figure 1.

Section 4. Analytic Semigroups

91

4.3 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be a densely defined sectorial operator of angle δ. Then, for all z ∈ Σδ , the maps T (z) are bounded linear operators on X satisfying the following properties. (i) T (z) is uniformly bounded for z ∈ Σδ if 0 < δ < δ. (ii) The map z → T (z) is analytic in Σδ . (iii) T (z1 + z2 ) = T (z1 )T (z2 ) for all z1 , z2 ∈ Σδ . (iv) The map z → T (z) is strongly continuous in Σδ ∪ {0} if 0 < δ < δ. Proof. We first verify that for z ∈ Σδ , with δ ∈ (0, δ) fixed, the integral in (4.2) defining T (z) converges uniformly in L(X) with respect to the operator norm. Because the integrand is analytic in µ ∈ Σ π/2+δ , this integral, if it exists, is by Cauchy’s integral theorem independent of the particular choice of γ. Hence, we may choose γ = γr as in Figure 1; i.e., γ consists of the three parts

(4.3)

where ε :=

π γr,1 : −ρe−i( /2+δ−ε) : −∞ ≤ ρ ≤ −r , γr,2 : reiα : −( π/2 + δ − ε) ≤ α ≤ ( π/2 + δ − ε) ,

π γr,3 : ρei( /2+δ−ε) : r ≤ ρ ≤ ∞ , (δ−δ )/2

> 0 and r := 1/|z|. Im z

γ1,3 δ−ε 111111111111111 000000000000000 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 δ σ(A) 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 000000000000000 111111111111111 γ1,1 000000000000000 111111111111111

r γ1,2

Figure 1 Then, for µ ∈ γr,3 , z ∈ Σδ , we can write µz = |µz| ei(arg µ+arg z) ,

Re z

92


where π/2 + ε ≤ arg µ + arg z ≤

3π 2

− ε. Hence, we have

1 Re(µz) = cos(arg µ + arg z) ≤ cos π/2 + ε = − sin ε, |µz| and therefore |eµz | ≤ e−|µz| sin ε

(4.4)

for all z ∈ Σδ and µ ∈ γr,3 . Similarly, one shows that (4.4) is true for z ∈ Σδ and µ ∈ γr,1 , from which we conclude eµz R(µ, A) ≤ e−|µz| sin ε

(4.5)

Mε |µ|

for all z ∈ Σδ and µ ∈ γr,1 ∪ γr,3 . On the other hand, the estimate eµz R(µ, A) ≤ e

(4.6)

Mε = eMε |z| |µ|

holds for all z ∈ Σδ and µ ∈ γr,2 . Using the estimates (4.5) and (4.6), we then conclude 3 µz e R(µ, A) dµ ≤ eµz R(µ, A) dµ γr

k=1

γr,k

≤ 2Mε

∞ 1/ |z|

= 2Mε 1

∞

1 −ρ|z| sin ε 2π dρ + eMε |z| · e ρ |z| 1 −ρ sin ε dρ + 2πeMε e ρ

for all z ∈ Σδ . This shows that the integral defining T (z) converges in L(X) absolutely and uniformly for z ∈ Σδ ; i.e., the operators T (z) are well-defined and satisfy (i). Moreover, from the above considerations, it follows that the map z → T (z) is analytic for z ∈ Σδ = ∪0 0 and choose γ = γ1 as in (4.3). Then, by Fubini’s theorem, we obtain 0

t0

et0 (µ−λ) − 1 R(µ, A)x dµ µ−λ γ t0 (µ−λ) e 1 = R(λ, A)x + R(µ, A)x dµ. 2πi γ µ − λ

e−λt T (t)x dt =

1 2πi

Here, we used the formula γ R(µ,A) µ−λ x dµ = −2πiR(λ, A)x, which can be verified using Cauchy’s integral formula and by closing γ on the right by circles of diameter converging to ∞. Because Re(µ − λ) ≤ −1, for ε = (δ−δ )/2 we can estimate t (µ−λ) e0 Mε −t0 R(µ, A)x dµ ≤ e |dµ| · x γ µ−λ γ |µ − λ| · |µ| and obtain (4.8) by taking the limit as t0 → ∞.

Combining the two previous results, we see that a densely defined sectorial operator is always the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup that can be extended analytically to some sector Σδ containing R+ . At this point, we remark that sectorial operators are characterized by the single resolvent estimate (4.1), whereas the Hille–Yosida Generation Theorem 3.8 requires estimates on all powers of the resolvent. Semigroups that can be extended analytically enjoy many nice properties; see, e.g., Theorem III.2.10, [EN00, Cors. IV.3.12, VI.3.6 and VI.7.17] and [Lun95]. Therefore, we give various characterizations of these analytic semigroups. First, we introduce the appropriate terminology.


95

4.5 Definition. A family of operators T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} ⊂ L(X) is called an analytic semigroup (of angle δ ∈ (0, π/2]) if (i) T (0) = I and T (z1 + z2 ) = T (z1 )T (z2 ) for all z1 , z2 ∈ Σδ . (ii) The map z → T (z) is analytic in Σδ . (iii) limΣδ z→0 T (z)x = x for all x ∈ X and 0 < δ < δ. If, in addition, (iv) T (z) is bounded in Σδ for every 0 < δ < δ, we call T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} a bounded analytic semigroup. In our next result, we give various equivalences characterizing generators of bounded analytic semigroups. 4.6 Theorem. For an operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X, the following statements are equivalent. (a) A generates a bounded analytic semigroup T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} on X. (b) There exists ϑ ∈ (0, π/2) such that the operators e±iϑ A generate bounded strongly continuous semigroups on X. (c) A generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X such that rg T (t) ⊂ D(A) for all t > 0, and (4.9)

M := sup tAT (t) < ∞. t>0

(d) A generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X, and there exists a constant C > 0 such that R(r + is, A) ≤

(4.10)

C |s|

for all r > 0 and 0 = s ∈ R. (e) A is densely defined and sectorial. Proof. We show that (a) ⇒ (b) ⇒ (d) ⇒ (e) ⇒ (c) ⇒ (a). iϑ (a) ⇒ (b). For ϑ ∈ (0, δ), we define Tϑ (t) := T (e t). Then, by Definition 4.5, the operator family Tϑ (t) t≥0 ⊂ L(X) is a bounded strongly continuous semigroup on X. In order to determine its generator, we define γ : [0, ∞) → C by γ(r) := eiϑ r. Then, by analyticity and Cauchy’s integral theorem, we obtain ∞ −t e T (t)x dt = e−r T (r)x dr R(1, A)x = 0

= eiϑ 0

γ ∞

iϑ

e−e

r

Tϑ (r)x dr = eiϑ R eiϑ , Aϑ x

for all x ∈ X, hence Aϑ = eiϑ A. Similarly, it follows that T (e−iϑ t) t≥0 is a bounded strongly continuous semigroup with generator e−iϑ A; i.e., (b) is proved.

96


(b) ⇒ (d). Let e−iϑ = a − ib for a, b > 0. Then, applying the Hille–Yosida )≥ Generation Theorem 3.8 to the generator e−iϑ A, we obtain a constant C 1 such that R(r + is, A) = e−iϑ R e−iϑ (r + is), e−iϑ A ≤

) C C ≤ ar + bs s

for all r, s > 0 and C := C˜/b. For s < 0, we obtain a similar estimate using the fact that eiϑ A is a generator on X. (d) ⇒ (e). By assumption, A generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup, and hence is densely defined by Proposition 1.7. Moreover, by Theorem 1.10 we have Σ π/2 ⊂ ρ(A). From Corollary V.1.14, we know that R(λ, A) ≥

1 dist(λ, σ(A))

for all λ ∈ ρ(A).

Therefore, the estimate (4.10) implies iR \ {0} ⊂ ρ(A) and, by continuity of the resolvent map, (4.11)

R(µ, A) ≤

C |µ|

for all 0 = µ ∈ iR.

We now develop the resolvent of A in 0 = µ ∈ iR in its Taylor series (see Proposition V.1.3), (4.12)

R(λ, A) =

∞

(µ − λ)n R(µ, A)n+1 .

n=0

This series converges uniformly in L(X), provided that |µ−λ|· R(µ, A) ≤ q < 1 for some fixed q ∈ (0, 1). In particular, for µ = i Im λ, we see from (4.11) that this is the case if | Re λ| ≤ q/C | Im λ|. Because this is true for arbitrary 0 < q < 1, we conclude that Re λ < 1 ⊂ ρ(A), λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ 0 and Im λ C and hence Σ π/2+δ ⊆ ρ(A) for δ := arctan 1/C . It remains to estimate R(λ, A) for λ ∈ Σ π/2+δ−ε and ε ∈ (0, δ). We assume first that Re λ > 0. Then, by the Hille–Yosida Generation The orem 3.8 for the bounded semigroup T (t) t≥0 , there exists a constant + ≥ 1 such that R(λ, A) ≤ M˜ /Re λ. Moreover, by (4.10), we have M R(λ, A) ≤ C/| Im λ|; hence there exists M ≥ 1 such that R(λ, A) ≤

M |λ|

if Re λ > 0.


97

In the case Re λ ≤ 0, we choose q ∈ (0, 1) such that δ − ε = arctan( q/C ). Then | Re λ/Im λ| ≤ q/C , and from estimate (4.11) combined with the Taylor expansion (4.12) for µ = i Im λ we obtain ∞

C n+1 | Im λ|n+1 n=0 √ C2 + 1 1 1 C ≤ · ≤ · . 1 − q | Im λ| 1−q |λ|

R(λ, A) ≤

| Re λ|n

(e) ⇒ (c). By Propositions 4.3 and 4.4, A generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , and the map (0, ∞) t → T (t)x ∈ X is differentiable for all x ∈ X. In particular, the limit lim h↓0

T (t + h) − T (t) T (h) − I T (t)x x = lim h↓0 h h

exists for all x ∈ X and t > 0; hence rg T (t) ⊂ D(A) for t > 0. Because for t > 0 the operator AT (t) is closed with domain D AT (t) = X, it is bounded by the closed graph theorem. To estimate its norm, we use the integral representation (4.2) of T (t) and obtain, using the closedness of A, the resolvent equation, and Cauchy’s integral theorem that 1 eµt R(µ, A) dµ 2πi γ 1 eµt µR(µ, A) − I dµ = 2πi γ 1 µeµt R(µ, A) dµ. = 2πi γ

AT (t) = A

Because by analyticity we may choose γ = γr for r := 1/t as in the proof of Proposition 4.3, we conclude, using (4.5) and (4.6), that ∞ 2πeMε µeµt R(µ, A) dµ ≤ 2Mε e−ρt sin ε dρ + t 1/ γ t

1 1 + πe · , ≤ 2Mε sin ε t where ε :=

(δ−δ )/2

for some δ ∈ (0, δ). This proves (c).

98


(c) ⇒ (a). We claim first that the map t → T (t)x ∈ X is infinitely many times differentiable for all t > 0 and x ∈ X. In fact, using the formula AT (s)y = T (s)Ay, valid for s ≥ 0 and y ∈ D(A) (see Lemma 1.3), one easily verifies by induction that rg T (t) ⊂ D(A∞ ) = ∩n∈N D(An ) and An T (t) = AT ( t/n) n for all t > 0 and n ∈ N. We now fix some ε ∈ (0, t). Then, by Lemma 1.3, An T (t)x = AT (t − ε)An−1 T (ε)x = .. . =

d dt T (t

− ε)An−1 T (ε)x

dn dtn T (t)x

for all x ∈ X. This establishes our claim. Combining this with (4.9) and dn the inequality3 n! en ≥ nn , we obtain, while writing T (n) (t) := dt n T (t), n 1 T (n) (t) ≤ eM n! t

(4.13)

for all n ∈ N and t > 0.

Next, we develop T (t) in its Taylor series. To this end, we choose t > 0 and x ∈ X arbitrary. Then, by Taylor’s theorem, we have for |h| < t and all n∈N n hk (k) 1 t+h (t + h − s)n T (n+1) (s)x ds. (4.14) T (t + h)x = T (t)x + k! n! t k=0

Denoting the integral term on the right-hand side of (4.14) by Rn+1 (t+h)x, we see from (4.13) that lim Rn+1 (t + h) = 0

n→∞

uniformly for |h| ≤ q · t/eM for every fixed q ∈ (0, 1). On the other hand, the series (4.15)

T (z) :=

∞ (z − t)k k=0

k!

T (k) (t)

converges uniformly for all z ∈ C satisfying |z − t| ≤ q · t/eM ; hence it extends the given semigroup T (t) t≥0 analytically to the sector Σδ for δ := arctan 1/eM . This proves (ii) of Definition 4.5. 3

Taking logarithms, this inequality can be restated as 1/n

follows from

1 0

log x dx = −1.

n k=1

log k/n ≥ −1, which


99

In order to verify the semigroup property for T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} , we first take some t > 0. Then the map Σδ z → T (t)T (z) ∈ L(X) is analytic and satisfies T (t)T (z) = T (t + z) for z ≥ 0. Hence, by the identity theorem for analytic functions, we conclude that T (t)T (z) = T (t + z) for all z ∈ Σδ . Now fix some z1 ∈ Σδ and consider the map Σδ z → T (z1 )T (z) ∈ L(X). This map is analytic as well and satisfies T (z1 )T (z) = T (z1 + z) for z ≥ 0. Using the analyticity again, we obtain the functional equation T (z1 )T (z2 ) = T (z1 + z2 ) for all z1 , z2 ∈ Σδ . To verify that z → T (z) is uniformly bounded on the sector Σδ for every 0 < δ < δ, we choose q ∈ (0, 1) such that δ := arctan ( q/eM ). Then, by equations (4.13) and (4.15), ∞ (i Im z)k (k) (Re z) T (z) = T k! k=0

(4.16)

≤

∞ k=0

| Im z|k

eM k Re z

≤

1 . 1−q

It remains only to prove that the map Σδ ∪ {0} z → T (z) ∈ L(X) is strongly in z = 0. To this end, we choose x ∈ X and ε > 0. continuous Because T (t) t≥0 is strongly continuous, there exists h0 > 0 such that T (h)x − x < ε(1 − q) for all 0 < h < h0 . Then, using (4.16), we obtain T (z)x − x ≤ T (z) x − T (h)x + T (z + h)x − T (h)x + T (h)x − x < 2ε + T (z + h) − T (h) · x for all h ∈ (0, h0 ). Because the map z → T (z + h) ∈ L(X) is analytic in some neighborhood of z = 0, we have limz→0 T (z + h) − T (h) = 0, which completes the proof of the implication (c) ⇒ (a). 4.7 Remarks. (i) We point out that from the previous proof it follows that for an analytic semigroup T (t) t≥0 and its generator A we always have rg T (t) ⊂ D(A∞ ) and (by (4.13)) for every n ∈ N lim tn An T (t) < ∞. t↓0

(ii) We note that in concrete applications one usually verifies condition (d) in Theorem 4.6 in order to show that an operator generates an analytic semigroup. In the case where the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is already known one can also try to verify condition (c). Next we give some abstract and concrete examples of analytic semigroups.

100


4.8 Corollary. If A is a normal operator on a Hilbert space H satisfying σ(A) ⊆ {z ∈ C : | arg(−z)| < δ}

(4.17) for some δ ∈ [0,

π/2),

then A generates a bounded analytic semigroup.

Proof. Because A is normal, the same is true for R(λ, A) for all λ ∈ ρ(A). Hence, by [TL80, Thm. VI.3.5] or [Wei80, Thm. 5.44], we have R(λ, A) = r R(λ, A) , and the assertion follows from Theorem 4.6.(d) combined with the Spectral Mapping Theorem for the Resolvent in Paragraph V.1.13. A different proof of the previous result is indicated in Exercise 4.14.(8). In particular, Corollary 4.8 shows that the semigroup generated by a selfadjoint operator A that is bounded above, which means that there exists w ∈ R such that 2

(Ax | x) ≤ w x

for all x ∈ D(A),

is analytic of angle π/2. Moreover, this semigroup is bounded if and only if w ≤ 0. 4.9 Example. In Paragraph II.3.30.(ii) we showed that the closure A of the operator Af := f ,

D(A) := {f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0} generates a strongly continuous contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 on the Hilbert space H = L2 [0, 1]. Because it is not difficult to show that Af := f ,

D(A) := {f ∈ H2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0} is self-adjoint, the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is analytic. See Exercise 4.14.(9) and, for more general operators, [EN00, Sect. VI.4]. It is, however, even simpler to verify the inequality in (3.29) with A replaced by e±iϑ A for some ϑ ∈ (0, π/2) in order to conclude that e±iϑ A are dissipative. Because ρ(e±iϑ A) = e±iϑ ρ(A), we then conclude by the Lumer– Phillips Theorem 3.15 that e±iϑ A are generators of contraction semigroups. Hence, Theorem 4.6.(b) implies that the operator A generates a bounded analytic semigroup on H. Another important class of generators of analytic semigroups is provided by squares of group generators. A be the generator of a strongly continuous group 4.10 Corollary. Let 2 π/2. T (t) t∈R . Then A generates an analytic semigroup S(t) of angle t≥0 Moreover, if T (t) t∈R is bounded this semigroup is given by 1 −s2 √ S(t) = e /4t T (s) ds, t > 0. 4πt R Proof. We first show that A2 generates an analytic semigroup where we assume that T (t) t∈R is bounded. For the general case we refer to [Nag86, A-II, Thm. 1.15].


101

Take some 0 < δ < π/2 and λ ∈ Σ π/2+δ . Then there exists a square root re of λ with 0 < r and |α| < ( π/2+δ )/2 < π/2, and we obtain iα

(λ − A2 ) = (reiα − A)(reiα + A). This implies λ ∈ ρ(A2 ) and R(λ, A2 ) = R(reiα , A)R(reiα , −A). Because A + ≥ 1 such that generates a bounded group, there exists a constant M + M R(µ, ±A) ≤ for all µ ∈ Σ π/2 . Re µ Consequently, one has

2 + +2 M M 1 R(λ, A2 ) ≤ ≤ 2 (r cos α)2 r cos π/2+δ 2 M for all λ ∈ Σ π/2+δ , = |λ| and the assertion follows from Propositions 4.3 and 4.4. The explicit representation of S(t) t≥0 can be proved by verifying that the Laplace transform of S(·) is given by R(·, A2 ). For the details see [ABHN01, Cor. 3.7.15]. 4.11 Example. It is immediately clear from the discussion of the translation groups in Paragraph 2.9 that starting from Af := f (and appropriate domain) on C0 (R) or Lp (R), 1 ≤ p < ∞, the operator A2 f = f generates a bounded analytic semigroup. We now consider the slightly more involved case of several space dimenn p n sions; i.e., we consider the spaces C0 (R ) or L (R ), 1 ≤ p < ∞. Denote by Ui (t) t∈R the strongly continuous group given by Ui (t)f (x) := f (x1 , . . . , xi−1 , xi + t, . . . , xn ), where x ∈ Rn , t ∈ R, and 1 ≤ i ≤ n, and let Ai be its generator. Obviously, 2 these semigroups commute as do the resolvents of2 Ai and hence of Ai . Denote by Ti (t) t≥0 the semigroup generated by Ai , which by Corollary 4.10 has an analytic extension Ti (z) z∈Σ π/2 . These extensions also commute, and therefore T (z) := T1 (z) · · · Tn (z), z ∈ Σ π/2 , defines a bounded analytic semigroup of angle π2 . The domain D(A) of its generator A contains D(A21 ) ∩ · · · ∩ D(A2n ) by Paragraph 2.6. In particular, it contains D0 := f ∈ X ∩ C2 (Rn ) : Dα f ∈ X for every multi-index α with |α| ≤ 2 , and for every f ∈ D0 the generator is given by n 2 ∂2 2 Af = A1 + · · · + An f = f = ∆f. ∂x2i i=1 Finally, we note that T (t) t≥0 is given by (2.8) in Paragraph II.2.12.

102


We close this section by studying the analyticity of multiplication semigroups and characterize it in terms of the function defining its generator. 4.12 Multiplication Semigroups. As in Definition I.3.3, we consider a multiplication operator Mq : f → q · f on X := C0 (Ω) (or, if one prefers, on Lp (Ω, µ)) for some continuous function q : Ω → C. If sups∈Ω Re q(s) < ∞, then Tq (t)f := etq · f defines a strongly continuous semigroup (see Proposition I.3.5) for which the following holds. Theorem. Let Tq (t) t≥0 be the strongly continuous multiplication semi group on X generated by the multiplication operator Mq . Then Tq (t) t≥0 is bounded and analytic if and only if the spectrum σ(M q ) = q(Ω) satisfies the conditions stated in Theorem 4.6. More precisely, Tq (t) t≥0 is bounded analytic of angle δ if and only if Σδ+ π/2 ⊂ C \ q(Ω) = ρ(Mq ). Proof. The condition is necessary by Theorem 4.6. Conversely, if Σδ+ π/2 is contained in C \ q(Ω), it follows that the functions q± := e±iδ · q still have nonpositive real part. By Proposition I.3.5, this implies that e±iδ · Mq are both generators of bounded strongly continuous semigroups. By Theorem 4.6.(b), this proves that Mq generates a bounded analytic semigroup. 4.13 Comment. We point out that in most of the above results the density of the domain of A is not needed. In fact, the integral (4.2) exists even for nondensely defined sectorial operators and yields an analytic semigroup without, however, the strong continuity in Proposition 4.3.(iv). This is treated in detail in [Lun95]. We close this subsection by adding an arrow to Diagram 1.14 in the case of analytic semigroups. T (t) t≥0

Ax=lim t↓0

A, D(A)

T (t)x−x t

@ I @ @ @ @ @ @ R(λ,A)=∞ e−λt T (t) dt @ µt @ @ 1 0 T (t)= 2πi e R(µ,A) dµ @ @ γ @ @ @ @ @ @ R @ @ R(λ,A)=(λ−A)−1 - R(λ, A) λ∈ρ(A) −1 A=λ−R(λ,A)


103

4.14 Exercises. (1) Let X be a Banach space and consider a function F : Ω → L(X) defined on an open set Ω ⊆ C. Show that the following assertions are equivalent. (a) F : Ω → L(X) is analytic. (b) F (·)x : Ω → X is analytic for all x ∈ X. (c) F (·)x, x : Ω → C is analytic for all x ∈ X and x ∈ X . (Hint: Use Cauchy’s integral formula and the uniform boundedness principle.) (2) Show that an analytic semigroup T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} for every 0 < δ < δ is exponentially bounded on Σδ . (3) Show that the generator A of an analytic semigroup T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} coincides with the “complex” generator; i.e., T (z)x − x T (z)x − x , D(A) = x ∈ X : lim exists Ax = lim Σδ z→0 Σδ z→0 z z for every 0 < δ < δ (4) Show that for an analytic semigroup T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} on a Banach space X one always has T (t)X ⊂ D(A∞ ) for all t > 0. (5∗ ) Give a proof of Corollary 4.10 in the case where the group T (t) t∈R is not necessarily bounded. (Hint: See [Nag86, A-II, Thm. 1.15].) (6) Let A, D(A) be a closed, densely defined linear operator on a Banach space X. If there exist constants δ > 0, r > 0, and M ≥ 1 such that Σ := {λ ∈ C : |λ| > r and | arg(λ)| < π/2 + δ} ⊆ ρ(A) and R(λ, A) ≤ M/|λ| for all λ ∈ Σ, then A − w is sectorial for w sufficiently large. In particular, A generates an analytic semigroup. (7) For an operator A, D(A) on a Banach space X define on X := X × X the operator matrix

A A A := with domain D(A) := D(A) × D(A). 0 A Show that the following assertions are equivalent. (i) A generates an analytic semigroup on X. (ii) A generates a strongly continuous semigroup on X. (iii) A generates an analytic semigroup on X. (Hint: If A generates the semigroup T (t) t≥0 , then the candidate for the (t) . Now semigroup T(t) t≥0 generated by A is given by T(t) = T 0(t) tAT T (t) use Theorem 4.6.(c).) (8) Give an alternative proof of Corollary 4.8 based on the Spectral Theorem I.3.9 and the results on multiplication semigroups from Section I.3.b. (Hint: Observe the theorem in Paragraph 4.12.)

104


(9) Show that the closure of the operator A in Example 4.9 is self-adjoint. (10∗ ) Show that for every closed and densely defined operator T on a Hilbert space H the operator T ∗ T is self-adjoint and positive semidefinite. (Hint: See [Ped89, Thm. 5.1.9].) (11) D := d/dx on L2 [a, b] with the domains Consider1 the first derivative 1 D D0 ) := H0 [a, b] := {f ∈ H [a, b] : f (a) = 0 = f (b) and D Dm ) := H1 [a, b]. (i) Show that (D0 )∗ = −Dm and (Dm )∗ = −D0 . (ii) Show that ∆D := Dm D0 and ∆N := D0 Dm generate bounded analytic semigroups. Write down these operators explicitly. Compare this with Example 4.9. (Hint: Use Exercise (10).) 2 (12) Show that the operator A := d /dx2 with domain D(A) := f ∈ 2 C [0, 1] : f (0) = 0 = f (1) generates an analytic contraction semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X := C[0, 1]. In addition, show that T (t)f ≥ 0 for every f ≥ 0; i.e., T (t) t≥0 is positive. (Hint: Observe Paragraphs II.2.11 and II.3.30.)

5. Further Regularity Properties of Semigroups We have seen in the previous section that requiring the orbit maps t → T (t)x to be analytic and not just continuous yields a new and important class of semigroups. In this section we discuss some regularity (or smoothness) properties lying between strong continuity and analyticity. For the first of these concepts we weaken analyticity (on a sector) to differentiability (on an interval). 5.1 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X is called eventually differentiable if there exists t0 ≥ 0 such that the orbit maps ξx : t → T (t)x are differentiable on (t0 , ∞) for every x ∈ X. The semigroup is called immediately differentiable if t0 can be chosen as t0 = 0. In analogy to the Hille–Yosida Theorem it is possible to characterize eventual/immediate differentiability by certain estimates on the resolvent of the generator (see [EN00, Sect. II.4.b] for precise statements). More important for both theoretical and practical purposes is the following class of semigroups where strong continuity becomes uniform after some time. 5.2 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is called eventually norm-continuous if there exists t0 ≥ 0 such that the function t → T (t) is norm-continuous from (t0 , ∞) into L(X). The semigroup is called immediately norm-continuous if t0 can be chosen to be t0 = 0.

Section 5. Further Regularity Properties of Semigroups

105

A Hille–Yosida type characterization of these semigroups is still open. However, immediately norm-continuous semigroups on Hilbert spaces can be characterized via a growth condition on the resolvent of the generator; see [EN00, Thm. II.4.20]. As a necessary condition in Banach spaces we show that the spectrum of their generators is bounded along imaginary lines in the complex plane. 5.3 Theorem. Let A, be the generator of an eventually norm D(A) continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Then, for every b ∈ R, the set

λ ∈ σ(A) : Re λ ≥ b

is bounded. Proof. Fix a ∈ R larger than the growth bound ω0 of T (t) t≥0 . If we show that for every ε > 0, there exist n ∈ N and r0 ≥ 0 such that R(a + ir, A)n

1/ n

for all r ∈ R with |r| ≥ r0 ,

1 ε

(see Corollary V.1.14). First, we obtain from the integral representation of the resolvent (see Corollary 1.11) that n+1

R(λ, A)

1 x= n!

∞

e−λt tn T (t)x dt

0

for all x ∈ X, n ∈ N, and Re λ > ω0 . Now choose t1 > 0 such that t → T (t) is norm-continuous on [t1 , ∞) and choose w ∈ (ω0 , a), M ≥ 1 such that t T (t) ≤ M ewt for t ≥ 0. Finally, set N := M · 0 1 e−at ewt dt and take ε > 0. Then there exist n ∈ N and t2 > t1 such that N · tn1 εn+1 < n! 3

and

1 n!

∞

tn e−at T (t) dt
ω0 . Up to now we have classified the semigroups according to smoothness (or regularity) properties of the map t → T (t). Next, we introduce a property of the semigroup based on the “regularity” of a single operator. We prepare for the definition with the following lemma. 5.5 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X. If T (t0 ) is compact for some t0 > 0, then T (t) is compact for all t ≥ t0 , and the map t → T (t) is norm-continuous on [t0 , ∞). Proof. The first assertion follows immediately from the semigroup law (FE). By Lemma I.1.2, we know that limh→0 T (s + h)x = T (s)x for all s ≥ 0 uniformly for x in any compact subset K of X. Let U be the unit ball in X. Because T (t0 ) is compact, we have that K := T (t0 )U is compact, and hence lim T (t)x − T (s)x = lim T (t − t0 ) − T (s − t0 ) T (t0 )x = 0

s→t

s→t

for arbitrary t ≥ t0 and uniformly for x ∈ U .


107

5.6 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is called immediately compact if T (t) is compact for all t > 0 and eventually compact if there exists t0 > 0 such that T (t0 ) is compact. From Lemma 5.5 we obtain that an immediately (eventually) compact semigroup is immediately (eventually) norm-continuous. In addition, one might expect some relation between the compactness of the semigroup and the compactness of the resolvent of its generator. Before introducing the appropriate terminology, we observe that due to the resolvent equation, a resolvent operator is compact for one λ ∈ ρ(A) if and only if it is compact for all λ ∈ ρ(A). 5.7 Definition. A linear operator A with ρ(A) = ∅ has compact resolvent if its resolvent R(λ, A) is compact for one (and hence all) λ ∈ ρ(A). Operators with compact resolvent on infinite-dimensional Banach spaces are necessarily unbounded (see Exercise 5.13.(1)). For concrete operators, the following characterization is quite useful. 5.8 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be an operator on X with ρ(A) = ∅ and take X1 := D(A), · A (see Section 2.c and Exercise 2.22.(1)). Then the following assertions are equivalent. (a) The operator A has compact resolvent. (b) The canonical injection i : X1 → X is compact. Proof. Observe that for every λ ∈ ρ(A), the graph norm · A is equivalent to the norm |||x|||λ := (λ − A)x (see the proof of Proposition 2.15.(i)). Therefore, the operator R(λ, A) : X → X1 is an isomorphism with continuous inverse λ−A. The assertion then follows from the following factorization. X 6 R(λ,A)

i

λ−A

? X1

-X *

R(λ,A)

This proposition allows us to prove that differential operators on certain function spaces have compact resolvent. It suffices to apply appropriate Sobolev embedding theorems; see, e.g., [RR93, Sect. 6.4]. Here is a very simple example.

108


5.9 Example. Let Ω be a bounded domain in Rn and take X = C0 (Ω). As sume that A, D(A) is an operator on X such that D(A) is a continuously embedded subspace of the Banach space C10 (Ω) := f ∈ C0 (Ω) : f is differentiable and f ∈ C0 (Ω) . By the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem, the injection i : C10 (Ω) → C0 (Ω) is compact, whence A has compact resolvent whenever ρ(A) = ∅. See Exercise 5.13.(4) for the analogous Lp -result. The relation between compactness of the semigroup and the resolvent is not simple. We show first what is not true. 5.10 Examples. (i) Consider the translation semigroup on the Banach space L1 ([0, 1] × [0, 1]) defined by T (t)f (r, s) :=

f (r + t, s) for r + t ≤ 1; 0 for r + t > 1.

This semigroup is nilpotent, hence eventually compact. However, its generator does not have compact resolvent. (See Exercise 5.13.(3).) (ii) The generator of the periodic translation group (or rotation group, see Paragraph I.3.18) has compact resolvent. The group, however, does not have any of the smoothness properties defined above. 5.11 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A. Moreover, assume that the map t → T (t) is norm-continuous at some point t0 ≥ 0 and that R(λ, A)T (t0 ) is compact for some (and hence all) λ ∈ ρ(A). Then the operators T (t) are compact for all t ≥ t0 . Proof. As usual, we may assume that 0 ∈ ρ(A). For the operators V (t) t defined by V (t)x := 0 T (s)x ds for x ∈ X and t ≥ 0 one has hence

AV (t)x = T (t)x − x for all x ∈ X; V (t) = R(0, A) I − T (t) .

The norm continuity for t ≥ t0 implies T (t0 ) = lim h↓0

1 V (t0 + h) − V (t0 ) h

in operator norm. Because it follows from the assumptions that V (t0 + h) − V (t0 ) is compact for all h > 0, this implies that T (t0 ) as the norm limit of compact operators is compact as well.


109

5.12 Theorem. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 the following properties are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is immediately compact. (b) T (t) t≥0 is immediately norm-continuous, and its generator has compact resolvent. Proof. If T (t) t≥0 is immediately compact, it is immediately normcontinuous by Lemma 5.5. Therefore, the integral representation for the resolvent in Theorem 1.10.(i) exists in the norm topology; hence R(λ, A) is compact. The converse implication follows from Lemma 5.11. We close these considerations by visualizing the implications between the various classes of semigroups in the following diagram. analytic

=⇒

immediately differentiable

=⇒

⇓ (5.2)

eventually differentiable

⇓

immediately norm-continuous =⇒ eventually norm-continuous

⇑ immediately compact

⇑ =⇒

eventually compact

It can be shown (using multiplication semigroups and nilpotent semigroups) that all these classes are different; see [EN00, Sect. II.4.e]. 5.13 Exercises. (1) Show that a bounded operator A ∈ L(X) has compact resolvent if and only if X is finite-dimensional. (2) Let A, D(A) be an operator on a Banach space X having compact resolvent and let B ∈ L(X) be such that ρ(A + B) = ∅. Then A + B has compact resolvent. (Hint: Use the formula U −1 − V −1 = U −1 (V − U )V −1 valid for each pair of invertible operators having the same domain.) (3) Show that the generator of the semigroup in Example 5.10.(i) does not have compact resolvent. (Hint: Compute the resolvent, using the integral representation (1.14), for functions of the form f (r, s) := h(r)g(s) for 0 ≤ r, s ≤ 1 and h, g ∈ L1 [0, 1].) n (4) Let X := Lp (Ω) for 1 ≤ p < ∞ and a bounded domain Ω ⊂ R with smooth boundary ∂Ω. If A, D(A) is an operator on X satisfying ρ(A) = ∅ and D(A) ⊂ W1,p (Ω), then A has compact resolvent. (Hint: Use Corollary A.11 and Sobolev’s embedding theorem.)

110


6. Well-Posedness for Evolution Equations Only now we turn our attention to what could have been, in a certain perspective, our starting point: We want to solve a differential equation. More precisely, we look at abstract (i.e., Banach-space-valued) linear initial value problems of the form u(t) ˙ = Au(t) for t ≥ 0, (ACP) u(0) = x, where the independent variable t represents time, u(·) is a function with values in a Banach space X, A : D(A) ⊂ X → X a linear operator, and x ∈ X the initial value. We start by introducing the necessary terminology. 6.1 Definition. (i) The initial value problem (ACP) is called the abstract Cauchy problem associated with A, D(A) and the initial value x. (ii) A function u : R+ → X is called a (classical ) solution of (ACP) if u is continuously differentiable, u(t) ∈ D(A) for all t ≥ 0, and (ACP) holds. If the operator A is the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup, it follows from Lemma 1.3.(ii) that the semigroup yields solutions of the associated abstract Cauchy problem. 6.2 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be the generator of the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Then, for every x ∈ D(A), the function u : t → u(t) := T (t)x is the unique classical solution of (ACP). The important point is that (classical) solutions exist if (and, by the definition of D(A), only if) the initial value x belongs to D(A). However, one might substitute the differential equation by an integral equation, thereby obtaining a more general concept of “solution.” 6.3 Definition. A continuous function u : R+ → X is called a mild solution t of (ACP) if 0 u(s) ds ∈ D(A) for all t ≥ 0 and u(t) = A

t

u(s) ds + x. 0

It follows from our previous (and elementary) results (use Lemma 1.3.(iv)) that for A being the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup, mild solutions exist for every initial value x ∈ X and are again given by the semigroup.

Section 6. Well-Posedness for Evolution Equations

111

6.4 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be the generator of the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Then, for every x ∈ X, the orbit map u : t → u(t) := T (t)x is the unique mild solution of the associated abstract Cauchy problem (ACP). Proof. We only have to show the uniqueness of the zero solution for the initial value x = 0. To this end, assume u to be a mild solution of (ACP) for x = 0 and take t > 0. Then, for each s ∈ (0, t), we obtain

s s d u(r) dr = T (t − s)u(s) − T (t − s)A u(r) dr = 0. ds T (t − s) 0

0

Integration of this equality from 0 to t gives t u(r) dr = 0, hence u(t) = u(0) = 0 0

as claimed.

The above two propositions are just reformulations of results on strongly continuous semigroups. They might suggest that the converse holds. The following example shows that this is not true. 6.5 Example. Let B, D(B) be a closed and unbounded operator on X. On the product space X := X ×X, consider the operator A, D(A) written in matrix form as

0 B A := with domain D(A) := X × D(B). 0 0 Then t → u(t) := x+tBy is the unique solution of (ACP) associated with y x A for every y ∈ D(A). However, the operator A does not generate a strongly continuous semigroup, because for every λ ∈ C, one has

λx−By (λ − A)D(A) = : x ∈ X, y ∈ D(B) ⊂ X × D(B) = X, λy and hence σ(A) = C. We now show which properties of the solutions u(·, x) or of the operator A, D(A) have to be added in order to characterize semigroup generators. To this end we first consider the following existence and uniqueness condition. (EU) For every x ∈ D(A), there exists a unique solution u(·, x) of (ACP). To this condition we add the nonemptiness of the resolvent set ρ(A) in (b) or some continuous dependence of the solutions upon the initial values in (c) below.

112


6.6 Theorem. Let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be a closed operator. Then for the associated abstract Cauchy problem u(t) ˙ = Au(t) for t ≥ 0, (ACP) u(0) = x the following properties are equivalent. (a) A generates a strongly continuous semigroup. (b) A satisfies (EU) and ρ(A) = ∅. (c) A satisfies (EU), has dense domain, and for every sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) satisfying limn→∞ xn = 0, one has limn→∞ u(t, xn ) = 0 uniformly in compact intervals [0, t0 ]. Proof. From the basic properties of semigroup generators and, in particular, Proposition 6.2, it follows that (a) implies (b) and (c). For (b) ⇒ (c) we first show that for all x ∈ X there exists a unique mild solution of (ACP). By assumption (EU), for each y := R(λ, A)x ∈ D(A), λ ∈ ρ(A), there is a classical solution u(·, y) with initial value y. Then it is easy to see that v(t) := (λ − A)u(t, y) defines a mild solution for the initial value x = (λ − A)y. In order to prove uniqueness let u(·) be a mild solution t to the initial value 0. Then v(t) := 0 u(s) ds is the classical solution for the initial value 0, hence v = 0 and consequently u = 0 as well. Because for t every x ∈ X we have, by definition of mild solutions, 0 u(s, x) ds ∈ D(A), we obtain from 1 t u(s, x) ds → u(0, x) = x as t ↓ 0 t 0 that D(A) is dense. The uniqueness of the mild solutions implies linearity of u(t, x) in x. In order to show the continuous dependence upon the initial data, we consider for fixed t0 > 0 the linear map Φ : X → C([0, t0 ], X),

x → u(·, x)

and show that Φ is closed. In fact, if xn → x and Φ(xn ) → y ∈ C([0, t0 ], X) we obtain for t ∈ [0, t0 ], t t u(s, xn ) ds → y(s) ds D(A) 0

and

0

t

u(s, xn ) ds = u(t, xn ) − xn → y(t) − x. t Hence, by the closedness of A we conclude that 0 y(s) ds ∈ D(A) and t A 0 y(s) ds = y(t) − x. Consequently y(·) is the unique mild solution of (ACP) with initial value x if for t > t0 we define y(t) := u(t − t0 , y(t0 )). This shows y(t) = u(t, x) for t ∈ [0, t0 ] and Φ(x) = y. By the closed graph theorem Φ is continuous; hence for xn → 0 we obtain u(t, xn ) → 0 in C([0, t0 ], X), i.e., uniformly for t in the compact interval [0, t0 ]. This proves (c). A

0

Section 6. Well-Posedness for Evolution Equations

113

(c) ⇒ (a). The assumption implies the existence of bounded operators T (t) ∈ L(X) defined by T (t)x := u(t, x) for each x ∈ D(A). Moreover, we claim that sup0≤t≤1 T (t) < ∞. By contradiction, assume that there exists a sequence (tn )n∈N ⊂ [0, 1] such that T (tn ) → ∞ as n → ∞. Then we can choose xn ∈ D(A) such that limn→∞ xn = 0 and T (tn )xn ≥ 1. Because u(tn , xn ) = T (tn )xn , this contradicts the assumption in (c), and therefore T (t) is uniformly bounded for t ∈ [0, 1]. Now, t → T (t)x is continuous for each x in the dense domain D(A), and we obtain continuity for each x ∈ X by Lemma I.1.2. Finally, the uniqueness of the solutions implies T (t + s)x = T (t)T (s)x for each x ∈ D(A) and all t, s ≥ 0. Thus T (t) t≥0 is a strongly continuous semigroup on X. Its generator B, D(B) certainly satisfies A ⊂ B. Moreover, the semigroup T (t) t≥0 leaves D(A) invariant, which, by Proposition 1.7, is a core of B. Because A is closed, we obtain A = B. Observe that (a) and (b) in the previous theorem imply that D(A) is dense, whereas this property cannot be omitted in (c). Take the restriction ) of a closed operator A to the domain D(A) ) := {0}. A Intuitively, property (c) expresses what we expect for a “well-posed” problem and its solutions: existence + uniqueness + continuous dependence on the data. Therefore we introduce a name for this property. 6.7 Definition. The abstract Cauchy problem u(t) ˙ = Au(t) for t ≥ 0, (ACP) u(0) = x associated with a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X is called well-posed if condition (c) in Theorem 6.6 holds. With this terminology, we can rephrase Theorem 6.6. 6.8 Corollary. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X, the associated abstract Cauchy problem (ACP) is well-posed if and only if A generates a strongly continuous semigroup on X. Once we agree on the well-posedness concept from Definition 6.7, strongly continuous semigroups emerge as the perfect tool for the study of abstract Cauchy problems (ACP). In addition, this explains why in this manuscript we • Study semigroups systematically and only then • Solve Cauchy problems.

114


However, we have to point out that our definition of “well-posedness” is not the only possible one. In particular, in many situations arising from physically perfectly “well-posed” problems one does not obtain a semigroup on a given Banach space. We refer to [ABHN01], [Are87], [deL94], and [Neu88] for weaker concepts of “well-posedness” and show here how to produce, for the same operator by simply varying the underlying Banach space, a series of different “well-posedness” properties. 6.9 Example. Consider the left translation group T (t) t∈R on L1 (R) with generator Af := f and D(A) := W1,1 (R). Decompose this space as L1 (R) = L1 (R− ) ⊕ L1 (R+ ), and take any translation-invariant Banach space Y continuously embedded in L1 (R− ). Then the part A| of A in X := Y ⊕L1 (R+ ) has domain D(A| ) := {f ∈ W1,1 (R) : f|R ∈ Y }. The abstract Cauchy problem − u(t) ˙ = A| u(t)

for t ≥ 0,

u(0) = f ∈ D(A| ) ⊂ X formally has the solution t → u(t) := T (t)f with T (t)f (s) = f (s + t), s ∈ R. This is a classical solution if and only if u(t) ∈ D(A| ) for all t ≥ 0. As concrete examples, we suggest taking Y := Wn,1 (R− ), or even Y := {0}, and leave the details as Exercise 6.10. 6.10 Exercise. On X := W1,1 (R− )⊕L1 (R+ ), consider the operator Af := f with D(A) := {(f, g) ∈ W2,1 (R− ) ⊕ W1,1 (R+ ) : f (0) = g(0)}. (i) Which conditions of Generation Theorem 3.8 are fulfilled by the operator A, D(A) ? (Hint: Use (2.1) in Section 2.b to represent R(λ, A).) (ii) Show that the abstract Cauchy problem associated with A, D(A) has a classical solution only for initial values (f, g) ∈ D(A) such that g ∈ W2,1 (R+ ). (iii) Replace W2,1 (R− ) by other translation-invariant Banach function spaces on R− and find the initial values for which classical solutions exist.

Chapter III Perturbation of Semigroups

The verification of the conditions in the various generation theorems from Sections II.3–4 is not an easy task and for many important operators cannot be performed in a direct way. Therefore, one tries to build up the given operator (and its semigroup) from simpler ones. Perturbation and approximation are the standard methods for this approach and are discussed in this and the next chapter.

1. Bounded Perturbations In many concrete situations, the evolution equation (or the associated linear operator) is given as a (formal) sum of several terms having different physical meaning and different mathematical properties. Although the mathematical analysis may be easy for each single term, it is not at all clear what happens after the formation of sums. In the context of generators of semigroups we take this as our point of departure. 1.1 Problem. Let A : D(A) ⊆ X → X be the generator of a strongly con tinuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 and consider a second operator B : D(B) ⊆ X → X. Find conditions such that the sum A + B generates a strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 . We say that the generator A is perturbed by the operator B or that B is a perturbation of A. However, before answering the above problem, we 115

116

Chapter III. Perturbation of Semigroups

have to realize that—at this stage—the sum A + B is defined as (A + B)x := Ax + Bx only for

x ∈ D(A + B) := D(A) ∩ D(B),

a subspace that might be trivial in general. To emphasize this and other difficulties caused by the addition of unbounded operators, we first discuss some examples. 1.2 Examples. (i) Let A, D(A) be an unbounded generator of a strongly continuous semigroup. If we take B := −A, then the sum A + B is the zero operator, defined on the dense subspace D(A), hence not closed. If we take B := −2A, then the sum is A + B = −A

with domain

D(A + B) = D(A),

which is a generator only if A generates a strongly continuous group (see Paragraph II.3.11). (ii) Let A : D(A) ⊆ X → X be an unbounded generator of a strongly continuous semigroup and take an isomorphism S ∈ L(X) such that D(A) ∩ S D(A) = {0}. Then B := SAS −1 is a generator as well (see Paragraph II.2.1), but A + B is defined only on D(A + B) = D(A) ∩ D(B) = D(A) ∩ S D(A) = {0}. A concrete example for this situation is given on X := C0 (R+ ) by and

Af := f

with its canonical domain D(A) := C10 (R+ )

Sf := q · f

for some continuous, positive function q such that q and q −1 are bounded and nowhere differentiable. Defining the operator B as Bf := q · (q −1 · f )

on

D(B) := f ∈ X : q −1 · f ∈ D(A) ,

we obtain that the sum A + B is defined only on {0}. The above examples show that the addition of unbounded operators is a delicate operation and should be studied carefully. We start with a situation in which we avoid the pitfall due to the differing domains of the operators involved. More precisely, we assume one of the two operators to be bounded. 1.3 Bounded Perturbation Theorem. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X satisfying T (t) ≤ M ewt for all t ≥ 0

Section 1. Bounded Perturbations

117

and some w ∈ R, M ≥ 1. If B ∈ L(X), then C := A + B

with

D(C) := D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 satisfying S(t) ≤ M e(w+M B)t

for all t ≥ 0.

Proof. In the first and essential step, we assume w = 0 and M = 1. Then λ ∈ ρ(A) for all λ > 0, and λ − C can be decomposed as (1.1) λ − C = λ − A − B = I − BR(λ, A) (λ − A). Because λ−A is bijective, we conclude that λ−C is bijective; i.e., λ ∈ ρ(C), if and only if I − BR(λ, A) is invertible in L(X). If this is the case, we obtain R(λ, C) = R(λ, A)[I − BR(λ, A)]−1 .

(1.2)

Now choose Re λ > B . Then BR(λ, A) ≤ Theorem II.3.5.(c), and hence λ ∈ ρ(C) with (1.3)

R(λ, C) = R(λ, A)

∞

B/Re λ

< 1 by Generation

(BR(λ, A))n .

n=0

We now estimate R(λ, C) ≤

1 1 1 · = Re λ 1 − B/Re λ Re λ − B

for all Re λ > B and obtain from Corollary II.3.6 that C generates a strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 satisfying S(t) ≤ eBt for t ≥ 0. For general w ∈ R and M ≥ 1, we first do a rescaling (see Paragraph II.2.2) to obtain w = 0. As in Lemma II.3.10, we then introduce a new norm |||x||| := sup T (t)x t≥0

on X. This norm satisfies x ≤ |||x||| ≤ M x , makes T (t) t≥0 a contraction semigroup, and yields

|||Bx||| ≤ M B · x ≤ M B · |||x||| for all x ∈ X. By part one of this the sum C = A + B generates a proof, strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 satisfying the estimate |||S(t)||| ≤ e|||B|||t ≤ eM Bt . Hence

S(t)x ≤ |||S(t)x||| ≤ eM Bt |||x||| ≤ M eM Bt x

for all t ≥ 0, which is the assertion for w = 0.

118


The identities (1.1) and (1.3) are not only the basis of this proof, but are also the key to many more perturbation results. Here, we apply them to extend the above theorem to certain unbounded perturbations. For this purpose we use the terminology of Sobolev towers from Section II.2.c. For sufficiently large λ, the generator A of a strongly continuous semigroup, and an operator B ∈ L(X), the operators

I − BR(λ, A)

and

∞ I − BR(λ, A) −1 = BR(λ, A) n n=0

are isomorphisms of the Banach space X. Therefore, for large λ, the 1norms with respect to λ − A and λ − A − B, i.e., A

and

x 1 := (λ − A)x A+B

x 1

:= (λ − A − B)x = I − BR(λ, A) (λ − A)x ,

are equivalent on X1 := D(A) = D(A + B). Similarly, the corresponding (−1)-norms A

x −1 := R(λ, A)x

and

A+B

x −1

:= R(λ, A + B)x

are equivalent on X (use the identity (1.4)

R(λ, A) = [I + R(λ, A + B)B]−1 R(λ, A + B)

A+B A and (1.2)), and hence the Sobolev spaces X−1 for A and X−1 for A + B from Definition II.2.17 coincide. Because we know from Theorem 1.3 that A + B is a generator, we obtain the following conclusion. 1.4 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X0 and take B ∈ L(X0 ). Then the operator

A+B

with domain D(A + B) := D(A)

is a generator, and the Sobolev spaces XiA

and

XiA+B

corresponding to A and A + B, respectively, coincide for i = −1, 0, 1. We show in Exercise 1.13.(5) that this result is optimal in the sense that in general, only these three “floors” of the corresponding Sobolev towers coincide. Here, the above corollary immediately yields a first perturbation result for operators that are not bounded on the given Banach space.


119

1.5 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup on the Banach space X0 . If B is a bounded operator on X1A := D(A), · 1 , then A + B with domain D(A + B) = D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup on X0 . Proof. Consider the restriction A1 of A as a generator on X1A . Then A1 +B generates a strongly continuous semigroup on X1A by Theorem 1.3. This 1 +B perturbed semigroup can be extended to its extrapolation space (X1A )A , −1 A A1 which by Corollary 1.4 coincides with the extrapolation space (X1 )−1 . However, this is the original Banach space X0 . The generator of the extended semigroup on X0 is the continuous extension of A1 + B, hence is A + B. 1.6 Example. Take Af := f on X := C0 (R) with domain C10 (R). For some h ∈ C10 (R) define the operator B by Bf := f (0) · h, f ∈ C10 (R). Then B is unbounded on X but bounded on D(A) = C10 (R), and hence A + B is a generator on X. Returning to Theorem 1.3, we recall that we have the series representation (1.3) for the resolvent R(λ, A +B) of the perturbed operator A + B, whereas for the new semigroup S(t) t≥0 we could prove only its existence. In order to prepare for a representation formula for this new semigroup, we show first that it has to satisfy an integral equation. 1.7 Corollary. Consider two strongly continuous semigroups T (t) t≥0 with generator A and S(t) t≥0 with generator C on the Banach space X and assume that C =A+B for some bounded operator B ∈ L(X). Then t T (t − s)BS(s)x ds (IE) S(t)x = T (t)x + 0

holds for every t ≥ 0 and x ∈ X. Proof. Take x ∈ D(A) and consider the functions [0, t] s → ξx (s) := T (t − s)S(s)x ∈ X. Because D(A) = D(C) is invariant under both semigroups, it follows that ξx (·) is continuously differentiable (use Lemma A.19) with derivative d ds ξx (s)

= T (t − s)CS(s)x − T (t − s)AS(s)x = T (t − s)BS(s)x.

This implies

S(t)x − T (t)x = ξx (t) − ξx (0) = 0

t

ξx (s) ds

t

T (t − s)BS(s)x ds.

= 0

Finally, the density of D(A) and the boundedness of the operators involved yield that this integral equation holds for all x ∈ X.

120


If we replace the above functions ξx by ηx (s) := S(s)T (t − s)x and use the same arguments, we obtain the analogous integral equation ∗

(IE )

t

S(s)BT (t − s)x ds

S(t)x = T (t)x + 0

for x ∈ X and t ≥ 0. Both equations (IE) and (IE∗ ) are frequently called the variation of parameter formula for the perturbed semigroup. Instead of solving the integral equation (IE) by the usual fixed point method, we use an abstract and seemingly more complicated approach. However, it has the advantage of working equally well for important unbounded perturbations. For these more general perturbations we refer to [EN00, Sect. III.3]. In order to explain our method we rewrite (IE) in operator form and introduce the operator-valued function space Xt0 := C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) of all continuous functions from [0, t0 ] into Ls (X); i.e., F ∈ Xt0 if and only if F (t) ∈ L(X) and t → F (t)x is continuous for each x ∈ X. This space becomes a Banach space for the norm F ∞ := sup F (s) , s∈[0,t0 ]

F ∈ Xt0

(see Proposition A.4). We now define a “Volterra-type” operator on it. 1.8 Definition. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on X and take B ∈ L(X). For any t0 > 0, we call the operator defined by

t

T (t − s)BF (s)x ds

V F (t)x := 0

for x ∈ X, F ∈ C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) and 0 ≤ t ≤ t0 the associated abstract Volterra operator . The following properties of V should be no surprise to anyone familiar with Volterra operators in the scalar-valued situation. In fact, the proof is just a repetition of the estimates there and is omitted (see Exercise 1.13.(1)).


121

1.9 Lemma. The abstract operator V associated with the strongly Volterra continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 and the bounded operator B ∈ L(X) is a bounded operator in C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) and satisfies M B t0 n n (1.5) V ≤ n! for all n ∈ N and with M := sups∈[0,t0 ] T (s) . In particular, for its spectral radius we have (1.6)

r(V ) = 0.

From this last assertion it follows that the resolvent of V at λ = 1 exists and is given by the Neumann series; i.e., R(1, V ) = (I − V )−1 =

∞

V n.

n=0

We now turn back to our integral equation (IE), which becomes, in terms of our Volterra operator, the equation T (·) = (I − V )S(·) for the functions T (·), S(·) ∈ C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) . Therefore, (1.7)

S(·) = R(1, V )T (·) =

∞

V n T (·),

n=0

where the series converges in the Banach space C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) . Rewriting (1.7) for each t ≥ 0, we obtain the following representation for the semigroup S(t) t≥0 . This Dyson–Phillips series was found by F.J. Dyson in his work [Dys49] on quantum electrodynamics and then by R.S. Phillips in his first systematic treatment [Phi53] of perturbation theory for semigroups. 1.10 Theorem. The strongly continuous semigroup S(t) t≥0 generated by C := A + B, where A is the generator of T (t) t≥0 and B ∈ L(X), can be obtained as (1.8)

S(t) =

∞

Sn (t),

n=0

where S0 (t) := T (t) and (1.9)

t

T (t − s)BSn (s) ds.

Sn+1 (t) := V Sn (t) = 0

Here, the series (1.8) converges in the operator norm on L(X) and, because we may choose t0 in Lemma 1.9 arbitrarily large, uniformly on compact intervals of R+ . In contrast, the operators Sn+1 (t) in (1.9) are defined by an integral defined in the strong operator topology.

122


The Dyson–Phillips series and the integral equation (IE) from Corollary 1.7 are very useful when we want to compare qualitative properties of the two semigroups. Here is a simple example of such a comparison. 1.11 Corollary. Let T (t) t≥0 and S(t) t≥0 be two strongly continuous semigroups, where thegenerator of S(t) t≥0 is a bounded perturbation of the generator of T (t) t≥0 . Then T (t) − S(t) ≤ t M

(1.10)

for t ∈ [0, 1] and some constant M . Proof. From the integral equation (IE), we obtain t T (t − s)BS(s)x ds T (t)x − S(t)x ≤ 0

≤ t sup T (r) sup S(s) · B · x r∈[0,1]

s∈[0,1]

for all x ∈ X and t ∈ [0, 1].

Conversely, one can show that an estimate such as (1.10) for the difference of two semigroups implies a close relation between their generators; see [EN00, Sect. III.3.b] for more details. In the final result of this section we show that analyticity of a semigroup is preserved under bounded perturbation. 1.12 Proposition. Let T (t) t≥0 be an analytic semigroup with generator A on the Banach space X and take B ∈ L(X). Then also the semigroup S(t) t≥0 generated by A + B is analytic. Proof. The assertion is a consequence of Theorem II.4.6.(b) and the Bounded Perturbation Theorem 1.3. 1.13 Exercises. (1) Prove Lemma 1.9. (Hint: Show that V is a linear operator on the space C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) . Then use induction on n ∈ N to verify (1.5). Equa1 tion (1.6) then follows from the Hadamard formula r(V ) = limn→∞ V n /n for the spectral radius.) (2) Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on the Banach space X and S(t) t≥0 the semigroup with generator A + B for B ∈ L(X). (i) Show that instead of the integral equations (IE) and (IE∗ ) we can write t S(t)x = T (t)x + T (s)BS(t − s)x ds 0 and t S(t − s)BT (s)x ds S(t)x = T (t)x + 0

for x ∈ X, t ≥ 0.


123

(ii) Define a Volterra operator V ∗ based on the integral equation (IE∗ ) and show that ∞ S(t) = Sn∗ (t), n=0

where S0∗ (t) := T (t) and ∗ (t)x := V ∗ Sn∗ (t)x = Sn+1

t

Sn∗ (s)BT (t − s)x ds

0

for x ∈ X, t ≥ 0. (3) Show that the variation of parameter formulas (IE) and (IE∗ ) also holds for perturbations B ∈ L(X1 ) and x ∈ D(A). (4) Take the Banach space X := C0 (R) and a function q ∈ Cb (R), and define s q(τ ) dτ T (t)f (s) := e s−t · f (s − t) for s ∈ R, t ≥ 0, and f ∈ X. (i) Show that T (t) t≥0 is a strongly continuous semigroup on X. (ii) Compute its generator. (iii) What happens if the function q is taken in L∞ (R)? (iv) Can one allow the function q to be unbounded such that T (t) t≥0 still becomes a strongly continuous semigroup on X? (v) Assume that t

u(t, s) := e

s

q(τ ) dτ

is uniformly bounded for s, t ∈ R. Show that the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is similar to the left translation semigroup on X. (Hint: Use the multiplication operator Mu(·,0) as a similarity transformation.) (5) Let A, D(A) be an unbounded generator on the Banach space X. On the product space X := X × X define A := A0 I0 with domain D(A) := D(A) × X and the bounded operator B := 00 I0 . (i) Show that

x 2 XA+B = ∈ D(A) × X : Ax + y ∈ D(A) , = D (A + B) 2 y

2 hence is different from XA 2 = D(A ) × X. (ii) Prove a similar statement A 0 for the extrapolation spaces of order 2. (Hint: Consider A := 0 I with domain D(A) := D(A) × X and B := I0 00 .) This confirms the statement following Corollary 1.4.

124


2. Perturbations of Contractive and Analytic Semigroups As already shown in Example 1.2, addition of two unbounded operators is a very delicate operation and can destroy many of the good properties the single operators may have. This is, in part, due to the fact that the “naive” domain D(A + B) := D(A) ∩ D(B) for the sum A + B of the operators A, D(A) and B, D(B) can be too small (see Example 1.2.(ii)). In order to avoid this pitfall, we assume in this section that the perturbing operator B behaves well with respect to the unperturbed operator A. More precisely, we assume the following property. 2.1 Definition. Let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be a linear operator on the Banach space X. An operator B : D(B) ⊂ X → X is called (relatively) A-bounded if D(A) ⊆ D(B) and if there exist constants a, b ∈ R+ such that Bx ≤ a Ax + b x

(2.1)

for all x ∈ D(A). The A-bound of B is a0 := inf{a ≥ 0 : there exists b ∈ R+ such that (2.1) holds}. Before applying this notion to the perturbation problem for generators we discuss a concrete example. 2.2 Example. For an interval I ⊆ R we consider on X := Lp (I), 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞, the operators A := B :=

d2 dx2 , d dx ,

D(A) := W 2,p (I), D(B) := W 1,p (I).

Proposition. The operator B is A-bounded with A-bound a0 = 0. Proof. We choose an arbitrary bounded interval J := (α, β) ⊂ I, and set ε := β − α, J1 := (α, α + ε/3),

J2 := (α + ε/3, β − ε/3),

J3 := (β − ε/3, β).

Then, for all f ∈ D(A) and s ∈ J1 , t ∈ J3 there exists, by the mean value theorem, a point x0 = x0 (s, t) ∈ J such that f (x0 ) =

f (t) − f (s) . t−s

Using this and t − s ≥ ε/3, we obtain x 3 f (y) dy ≤ |f (s)| + |f (t)| + |f (y)| dy (2.2) |f (x)| = f (x0 ) + ε J x0

Section 2. Perturbations of Contractive and Analytic Semigroups

125

for all x ∈ J, s ∈ J1 , and t ∈ J3 . If we denote by · p,J the p-norm in Lp (J) and integrate inequality (2.2) on both sides with respect to s ∈ J1 and t ∈ J3 , we obtain ε2 ε2 |f (s)| ds + |f (t)| dt + |f (y)| dy |f (x)| ≤ 9 9 J J1 J3 ε2 f 1,J 9 1 ε2+ /q 1/ q ≤ ε f p,J + f p,J , 9 where we used Hölder’s inequality for 1/p + 1/q = 1. From this estimate, it then follows that 2+ 1/q ε2 1 1 1 ε f p,J f p,J ≤ ε /p ε /q f p,J + ε /p 9 9 ε3 = ε f p,J + f p,J ; 9 i.e., 9 f p,J ≤ f p,J + ε f p,J . ε By splitting the interval I in finitely or countable many (depending on whether I is bounded) disjoint subintervals In , n ∈ N ⊆ N, of length ε, we obtain by Minkowski’s inequality 1/p 1/p 1/p 9 Bf p = f pp,In ≤ f pp,In +ε f pp,In ε ≤ f 1,J +

n∈N

n∈N

n∈N

9 = f p + ε Af p . ε Because we can choose ε > 0 arbitrarily small, the proof of our claim is complete. Note that from (2.2) we immediately obtain an analogous result for the second and first derivative on X := C0 (I). More precisely, if I ⊆ R is an arbitrary interval and d2 D(A) := f ∈ C20 (I) : f , f ∈ C0 (I) , A := dx 2, d B := dx , D(B) := f ∈ C10 (I) : f ∈ C0 (I) , then B is A-bounded with A-bound a0 = 0. We now return to the abstract situation and observe that for an Abounded operator B the sum A + B is defined on D(A + B) := D(A). However, many desirable properties may get lost. 2.3 Examples. Take A : D(A) ⊂ X → X to be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup such that σ(A) = C− := {z ∈ C : Re z ≤ 0} (e.g., take the generator of the translation semigroup on C0 (R+ ); cf. Example V.1.25.(i)).

126


(i) If we take B := αA for α ∈ C, then A + B is not a generator for α ∈ C \ (−1, ∞), and is not even closed for α = −1. (ii) Consider the new operator A := A0 A0 with D(A) := D(A) × D(A) on the product space X := X × X. If we take

0 εA B1 := with D(B1 ) := X × D(A), 0 0 then A+B1 is not a generator for every 0 = ε ∈ C (use Exercise II.4.14.(7)). For

0 −A B2 := with D(B2 ) := D(A) × D(A), A −2A the sum A + B2 is not closed, and its closure is not a generator. We now proceed with a series of lemmas showing which assumptions on the unperturbed operator A and the A-bounded perturbation B are needed such that the sum A + B • Is closed, • Has nonempty resolvent set, and, finally, • Becomes the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup. 2.4 Lemma. If A, D(A) is closed and B, D(B) is A-bounded with A-bound a0 < 1, then A + B, D(A) is a closed operator. Proof. Because an operator is closed if and only if its domain is a Banach space for the graph norm, it suffices to show that the graph norm · A+B of A + B is equivalent to the graph norm · A of A. By assumption, there exist constants 0 ≤ a < 1 and 0 < b such that Bx ≤ a Ax + b x for all x ∈ D(A). Therefore, one has Ax = (A + B)x − Bx ≤ (A + B)x + a Ax + b x and, consequently, −b x +(1−a) Ax ≤ (A + B)x ≤ Ax + Bx ≤ (1+a) Ax +b x . This yields the estimate b x + (1 − a) Ax ≤ (A + B)x + 2b x ≤ (1 + a) Ax + 3b x , proving the equivalence of the two graph norms.


127

2.5 Lemma. Let A, D(A) be closed with ρ(A) = ∅ and assume B, D(B) to be A-bounded with constants 0 ≤ a, b in estimate (2.1). If λ0 ∈ ρ(A) and c := a AR(λ0 , A) + b R(λ0 , A) < 1,

(2.3)

then A + B is closed, and one has λ0 ∈ ρ(A + B) with R(λ0 , A + B) ≤ (1 − c)−1 R(λ0 , A) .

(2.4).

Proof. As in the proof of Theorem 1.3, we decompose λ0 − A − B as the product λ0 − A − B = [I − BR(λ0 , A)](λ0 − A) and observe that λ0 −A is a bijection from D(A) onto X, whereas BR(λ0 , A) is bounded on X (use Exercise 2.15.(1.i)). If we show that BR(λ0 , A) < 1, we obtain that [I − BR(λ0 , A)], hence λ0 − A − B, is invertible with inverse R(λ0 , A + B) = R(λ0 , A)

(2.5)

∞

BR(λ0 , A) n

n=0

satisfying R(λ0 , A + B) ≤ R(λ0 , A) (1 − BR(λ0 , A) )−1 . To that purpose, take x ∈ X and use (2.1) to obtain BR(λ0 , A)x ≤ a AR(λ0 , A)x + b R(λ0 , A)x ≤ a AR(λ0 , A) + b R(λ0 , A) · x , whence BR(λ0 , A) ≤ c < 1 by assumption (2.3).

In the last preparatory lemma, we consider operators satisfying a Hille– Yosida type estimate for the resolvent (but not for all its powers as required in Generation Theorem II.3.8). It is shown that this class of operators remains invariant under A-bounded perturbations with small A-bound. 2.6 Lemma. Let A, D(A) be an operator whose resolvent exists for all 0 = λ ∈ Σδ := {z ∈ C : | arg z| ≤ δ} and satisfies R(λ, A) ≤

M |λ|

for some constants δ ≥ 0 and M ≥ 1. Moreover, assume B, D(B) to be A-bounded with A-bound 1 a0 < . M +1 + ≥ 1 such that Then there exist constants r ≥ 0 and M Σδ ∩ {z ∈ C : |z| > r} ⊂ ρ(A + B) for all λ ∈ Σδ ∩ {z ∈ C : |z| > r}.

and

R(λ, A + B) ≤

+ M |λ|

128


Proof. Choose constants 0 ≤ a < 1/M +1 and 0 ≤ b satisfying the estimate (2.1). From this we obtain c : = a AR(λ, A) + b R(λ, A) = a λR(λ, A) − I + b R(λ, A) bM ≤ a(M + 1) + < 1, |λ| + := whenever |λ| > r := bM/(1−a(M +1)). Choosing M now follows from Lemma 2.5.

M/1−c

the assertion

+ = 1, we obtain a perturIf we now assume the constants to be M = M bation theorem for generators of contraction semigroups. The surprising fact is that the relative bound a0 , which in Lemma 2.6 and for M = 1 should be smaller than 1/2, must only satisfy a0 < 1. The dissipativity (see Definition II.3.13) of the operators involved makes this possible. 2.7 Theorem. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a contraction semigroup and assume B, D(B) to be dissipative and A-bounded with A-bound a0 < 1. Then A + B, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup. Proof. We first assume that a0 < 1/2. From the criterion in Proposition II.3.23, it follows that the sum of a generator of a contraction semigroup and a dissipative operator is again dissipative. Therefore, A + B is a densely defined, dissipative operator, and by Theorem II.3.15 it suffices to find λ0 > 0 such that λ0 ∈ ρ(A+B). This, however, follows from Lemma 2.6 by choosing δ = 0; i.e., Σδ = [0, ∞). In order to extend this to the case 0 ≤ a0 < 1, we define for 0 ≤ α ≤ 1 the operators Cα := A + αB, D(Cα ) := D(A). Then, for x ∈ D(A), one has Bx ≤ a Ax + b x ≤ a( Cα x + α Bx ) + b x ≤ a Cα x + a Bx + b x ; and hence Bx ≤

b a Cα x + x 1−a 1−a

for all

Next, we choose k ∈ N such that c :=

1 a < . k(1 − a) 2

0 ≤ α ≤ 1.


129

Then the estimate 1 Bx ≤ c Cα x + k

b x k(1 − a)

shows that for each 0 ≤ α ≤ 1 the operator 1/kB is Cα -bounded with Cα -bound less than 1/2. As observed above, this implies that Cα + k1 B = A + (α + k1 )B generates a contraction semigroup whenever Cα = A + αB does. However, A generates a contraction semigroup, hence A + 1/kB does. Repeating this argument k times shows that (A + (k−1)/kB) + 1/kB = A + B generates a contraction semigroup as claimed. In the limit case, i.e., if one has a = 1 in the estimate (2.1), the result remains essentially true, provided that the adjoint of B is densely defined. 2.8 Corollary. Let A,D(A) bethe generator of a contraction semigroup on X and assume that B, D(B) is dissipative, A-bounded, and satisfies Bx ≤ Ax + b x

(2.6)

for all x ∈ D(A) and some constant b ≥ 0. If the adjoint B is densely defined on X , then the closure of A + B, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup on X.

Proof. The sum A + B remains dissipative and densely defined. Hence, by the Lumer–Phillips Theorem II.3.15, it suffices to show that rg(I − A − B) is dense in X. Choose y ∈ X satisfying z, y = 0 for all z ∈ rg(I − A − B) and then y ∈ X such that y, y = y . The perturbed operators A + εB with domain D(A) are generators of contraction semigroups for each 0 ≤ ε < 1 by Theorem 2.7. From Generation Theorem II.3.5 we obtain 1 ∈ ρ(A+εB), and hence there exists a unique xε ∈ D(A) such that xε ≤ y and xε − (A + εB)xε = y. From the estimate Bxε ≤ Axε + b xε ≤ (A + εB)xε + ε Bxε + b xε ≤ xε − y + ε Bxε + b xε we deduce (2.7)

(1 − ε) Bxε ≤ xε − y + b xε ≤ (2 + b) y

for all 0 ≤ ε < 1.

130


We now use the density of D(B ). In fact, for z ∈ D(B ) it follows that | (1 − ε)Bxε , z | ≤ (1 − ε) xε · B z ≤ (1 − ε) y · B z , and hence lim (1 − ε)Bxε , z = 0. ε↑1

Our assumption and the norm boundedness of the elements (1− ε)Bxε (see (2.7)) then implies lim (1 − ε)Bxε , y = 0, ε↑1

and therefore y = y, y = xε − (A + εB)xε , y = (1 − ε)Bxε , y + (I − A − B)xε , y → 0 as ε ↑ 1. From the Hahn–Banach theorem we then conclude that rg(I − A − B) is dense in X. If X is reflexive, the adjoint of every closable, densely defined operator is again densely defined on the dual space (see Proposition A.14). Because densely defined, dissipative operators are always closable (see Proposition II.3.14.(iv)), we arrive at the following result. 2.9 Corollary. Let A, D(A) bethe generator of a contraction semigroup on a reflexive Banach space X. If B, D(B) is dissipative, A-bounded, and satisfies the estimate (2.6), then the closure of A + B, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup on X. In order to obtain the previous perturbation results, we used Lemma 2.6 and could estimate only the resolvent of the perturbed operator A + B and not all its powers. Due to the Lumer–Phillips Theorem II.3.15, this was sufficient if A was the generator of a contraction semigroup and B was dissipative. There is, however, another case where an estimate on the resolvent alone forces an operator to generate a semigroup. Such a result has been proved in Theorem II.4.6 for analytic semigroups and now easily leads to another perturbation theorem. 2.10 Theorem. Let the operator A, D(A) generate an analytic semi group T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} on a Banach space X. Then there exists a constant α > 0 such that A + B, D(A) generates an analytic semigroup for every A-bounded operator B having A-bound a0 < α.


131

Proof. We first assume that T (z) z∈Σδ ∪{0} is bounded, which means, by Theorem II.4.6, that A is sectorial. Hence, there exist constants δ ∈ (0, π/2] and C ≥ 1 such that for every

π 0 = λ ∈ Σ π/2+δ := z ∈ C : | arg z| ≤ + δ 2 we have C λ ∈ ρ(A) and R(λ, A) ≤ . |λ| If we define α := 1/C+1, we can apply Lemma 2.6 and obtain constants r ≥ 0 and M ≥ 1 such that Σ := Σ π/2+δ ∩ {z ∈ C : |z| > r} ⊆ ρ(A + B) and

M for all λ ∈ Σ. |λ| By Exercise II.4.14.(6), this implies that A + B generates an analytic semigroup, proving the assertion in the bounded case. In order to treat the general case, we take w ∈ R and conclude from R(λ, A + B) ≤

Bx ≤ a Ax + b x ≤ a (A − w)x + (aw + b) x for all x ∈ D(A) that B is also A − w bounded with the same bound a0 . Because the semigroup generated by A − w is analytic and bounded in Σδ for w sufficiently large, the first part of the proof implies that A + B − w; hence A + B generates an analytic semigroup. 2.11 Examples. (i) In Example II.4.9 we showed that the second derivative d2 A := dx D(A) := f ∈ H2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0 2, generates an analytic semigroup on H := L2 [0, 1]. Because by Example 2.2 the first derivative d/dx with maximal domain H1 [0, 1] is A-bounded with A-bound a0 = 0, we concludeby Theorem 2.10 and Exercise 2.15.(1) that for all B ∈ L H1 [0, 1], L2 [0, 1] the operator C := A + B,

D(C) := D(A)

generates an analytic semigroup on H. (ii) As in Paragraph II.2.12, we consider the diffusion semigroup on L1 (Rn ) given by −n −|s−r|2/ 4t T (t)f (s) := (4πt) /2 e f (r) dr =: Kt (s − r)f (r) dr. Rn

Rn

It is generated by the closure of the Laplacian ∆ defined on the Schwartz space S (Rn ). In Example II.4.11 we have seen that T (t) t≥0 is a bounded analytic semigroup. As a perturbation we take the multiplication operator (Mq f )(s) := q(s)f (s) for f ∈ D(Mq ) := g ∈ L1 (Rn ) : qg ∈ L1 (Rn ) induced by a function q ∈ Lp (Rn ) for p > max{1, n/2}.

132


We now show that B := Mq is ∆-bounded with ∆-bound zero. To this end, we estimate for f ∈ L1 (Rn ) and λ > 0 ∞ −λt BR(λ, ∆)f L1 (Rn ) = B e T (t)f dt 1 n 0 L (R ) ∞ ≤ |q(s)| e−λt Kt (s − r)|f (r)| dr dt ds n 0 Rn R ∞ = |f (r)| e−λt Kt (s − r)|q(s)| ds dt dr n 0 R Rn ∞ ≤ f L1 (Rn ) sup e−λt Kt (s − r)|q(s)| ds dt r∈Rn

0

≤ f L1 (Rn ) · q Lp (Rn ) 0

Rn

∞

e−λt

Rn

Kt (s)p ds

1/p dt

older’s inequality. with 1/p + 1/p = 1, where we used Fubini’s theorem and H¨ −n It is now easy to verify that Kt Lp (Rn ) = ct /2p for a constant c > 0. Hence, we conclude that D(∆) ⊂ D(B) and ∞ −n e−λt t /2p dt (λ − ∆)f L1 (Rn ) Bf L1 (Rn ) ≤ c q Lp (Rn ) 0

=: aλ (λ − ∆)f L1 (Rn ) ≤ λaλ f L1 (Rn ) + aλ ∆f L1 (Rn ) ∞ −n for all f ∈ D(∆). Because aλ := c q Lp (Rn ) 0 e−λt t /2p dt converges to zero as λ → ∞,this proves our claim. Thus, by Theorem 2.10, the operator ∆+Mq , D(∆) generates an analytic semigroup for every q ∈ Lp (Rn ) with p > max{1, n/2}. We now introduce a class of operators always having A-bound zero with respect to a given operator A. 2.12 Definition. Let A, D(A) be a closed operator on a Banach space X. An operator B, D(B) is called (relatively) A-compact if D(A) ⊆ D(B) and B : X1 → X is compact, where X1 denotes the domain D(A) equipped with the graph norm · A . If ρ(A) is nonempty, one can show that an A-bounded operator B is Acompact if and only if BR(λ, A) ∈ L(X) is compact for some/all λ ∈ ρ(A), see Exercise 2.15.(1). Because compact operators are “small” in some sense, one might hope that an A-compact operator is A-bounded with bound 0. This is, however, not true in general (see [Hes70]), and we need some additional conditions to ensure it. 2.13 Lemma. Let A, D(A) be a closed operator on a Banach space X and assume B, D(B) to be A-compact. If (i) A is a generator and X is reflexive, or if (ii) B, D(B) is closable in X, then B is A-bounded with A-bound a0 = 0.


133

Proof. (i) For 0 < µ sufficiently large and x ∈ D(A), we write Bx = BR(µ, A)(µ − A)x = µBR(µ, A)x − BR(µ, A)AR(λ, A)(λ − A)x = µBR(µ, A)x − BR(µ, A)AλR(λ, A)x + BR(µ, A)AR(λ, A)Ax for all λ > µ. Because the operators appearing in the first two terms are bounded, it suffices to show that for each ε > 0 there exist λ > µ such that ε > BR(µ, A)AR(λ, A) = BR(µ, A) λR(λ, A) − I = λR(λ, A ) − I BR(µ, A) . If X is reflexive, then the adjoint operator A is again a generator (see Paragraph I.1.13). Therefore, by Lemma II.3.4, λR(λ, A ) converges strongly to I as λ → ∞. Moreover, BR(µ, A) and therefore its adjoint BR(µ, A) are compact operators. Combining these two properties and applying Proposition A.3 yields lim λR(λ, A ) − I BR(µ, A) = 0. λ→∞

(ii) Assume the assertion to be false. Then there exists ε > 0 and a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) such that (2.8) For yn := (2.9)

Bxn > ε Axn + n xn xn/x n A

for all n ∈ N.

this means Byn > ε Ayn + n yn .

Because yn A = 1 for all n ∈ N and because B is A-compact, there exists a subsequence (zn )n∈N of (yn )n∈N such that (Bzn )n∈N converges in X. Moreover, zn < Bzn /n and (Bzn )n∈N is bounded in X; hence limn→∞ zn = 0. Using the assumption that B is closable, this implies limn→∞ Bzn = 0 and therefore limn→∞ Azn = 0 by (2.9). This, however, yields a contradiction, in as much as 1 = zn A = zn + Azn

for all n ∈ N.

We again combine this lemma with our previous perturbation results. 2.14 Corollary. Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach space X and assume the operator B, D(B) to be A-compact. If X is reflexive or if B is closable, then the following assertions are true. (i) If A and B are dissipative, then A + cB, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup on X for all c ∈ R+ . (ii) If the semigroup generated by A is analytic, then A + cB, D(A) generates an analytic semigroup on X for all c ∈ C.

134


One can show that Corollary 2.14.(ii) holds without the extra assumptions that B is closable or that X is reflexive (see [DS88]). 2.15 Exercises. (1) Let A be an operator on a Banach space X having nonempty resolvent set ρ(A). Show that for a linear operator B : D(A) → X the following assertions are true. (i) B is A-bounded if and only if B ∈ L(X1 , X) if and only if BR(λ, A) ∈ L(X) for some/all λ ∈ ρ(A). (ii) B is A-compact if and only if BR(λ, A) is compact for some/all λ ∈ ρ(A). (2) Let A, D(A) be the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X and let B, D(B) be a closed operator on X. If there exists (i) A T (t) t≥0 -invariant dense subspace D ⊂ D(A) ∩ D(B) such that the map t → BT (t)x is continuous for all x ∈ D and (ii) Constants t0 > 0 and q ≥ 0 such that

t0

BT (t)x dt ≤ q x

for all x ∈ D,

0

then B is A-bounded with A-bound less than or equal to q. (Hint: Use the formula (2.10)

BR(λ, A)x =

∞ n=0

e

−λnt0

t0

e−λr BT (r)T (nt0 )x dr,

x ∈ D,

0

in order to show that BR(λ, A) is bounded on D. Then it follows from Proposition A.6.(i) and Theorem A.10 that D(A) ⊆ D(B). Finally, take in (2.10) the limit as λ → ∞ to estimate the A-bound of B.) (3) Assume A, D(A) to generate an analytic semigroup of angle δ ∈ (0, π]. Show that in the situation of Theorem 2.10 the semigroup generated by A + B is analytic of angle at least δ. (4) Take the operators Af := f and Bf := f with maximal domains in X := C0 (R). Show that A + αB − β generates a contraction semigroup for α ∈ R, β ≥ 0. Can one replace the constants α and β by certain functions? (5) Let A, D(A) be the generator of a contraction semigroup on the Banach space X. (i) If B, D(B) is dissipative, then A + B, D(A) ∩ D(B) is again dissipative. (ii) If B is dissipative and bounded, then A + B, D(A) generates a contraction semigroup.


135

(6) Take X := c0 and define A(xn ) := (inxn ) with domain D(A) consisting of all finite sequences. (i) Show that the closure A of A generates a group of isometries on X. (ii) Construct a different semigroup generator B, D(B) on X such that A and B coincide on D(A). (7) Let B be an operator on a Banach space X such that there exists a sequence (λn )n∈N ⊂ ρ(B) satisfying limn→∞ R(λn , B) = 0. Show that B is A := B 2 -bounded with A-bound a0 = 0. (Hint: Compute B 2 R(λ, B) using the formula BR(λ, B) = λR(λ, B) − I.)

Chapter IV Approximation of Semigroups

1. Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorems Approximation, besides perturbation, is the other main method used to study a complicated operator and the semigroup it generates. We already encountered an example for such an approximation procedure in our proof of the Generation Theorem II.3.5. For an operator A, D(A) on X satisfying the Hille–Yosida conditions, we defined the (bounded) Yosida approximants 1 An := nAR(n, A), n ∈ N (see II, (3.7)) generating the (uniformly continuous) semigroups tA Chapter e n t≥0 . Using the fact that An → A pointwise on D(A) as n → ∞ (see Lemma II.3.4.(ii)), we could show that the semigroups converge as well; that is, etAn → T (t)

as n → ∞.

In this section we study this situation systematically and consider the three objects semigroup, generator , and resolvent, visualized by the triangle 1 In this context, this notation should not cause any confusion with the operators A n induced on the abstract Sobolev spaces from Section II.2.c.

136

Section 1. Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorems

137

T (t) t≥0 @

@

@ @

A, D(A)

R(λ, A) λ∈ρ(A)

from Chapter II. We then try to show that the convergence at one “vertex” implies convergence in the two other “vertices.” That the truth is not as simple is shown by the following example. 1.1 Example. On the Banach space X := c0 , we take the multiplication operator A(xk ) := (ikxk ) with domain

D(A) := (xk ) ∈ c0 : (ikxk ) ∈ c0 .

As we know from Example I.3.7.(iii), it generates the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 given by T (t)(xk ) = (eikt xk ),

t ≥ 0.

Perturbing A by the bounded operators Pn (xk ) := (0, . . . , nxn , 0, . . .), we obtain new operators An := A + Pn .

Each An is the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup Tn (t) t≥0 (use Theorem III.1.3), and for each x = (xk ) ∈ D(A), we have An x − Ax = Pn x = n|xn | → 0. However, the semigroups Tn (t) t≥0 do not converge. In fact, one has Tn (t)x = (eit x1 , e2it x2 , . . . , e(in+n)t xn , e(n+1)it xn+1 , . . .) and therefore Tn (t) ≥ ent

for n ∈ N and t ≥ 0.

By the uniform boundedness principle, this implies that there exists x ∈ X such that Tn (t)x n∈N does not converge. The example shows that the convergence of the generators (pointwise on the domain of the limit operator) does not imply convergence of the corresponding semigroups. Another unpleasant phenomenon may happen for a converging sequence of resolvent operators.

138

Chapter IV. Approximation of Semigroups

1.2 Example. Take An := −n · I on any Banach space X = {0}. Then the resolvent operators 1 R(λ, An ) = ·I λ+n and their limit R(λ) := lim R(λ, An ) n→∞

exist for all Re λ > 0. However, the limit R(λ) is equal to zero, hence cannot be the resolvent of an operator on X. For our purposes we must exclude such a phenomenon. In order to do so, we need a new concept.

a. A Technical Tool: Pseudoresolvents In this subsection we consider bounded operators on a Banach space X that depend on a complex parameter and satisfy the resolvent equation (see Paragraph V.1.2, (1.2)). Here is the formal definition. 1.3 Definition. Let Λ ⊂ C and consider operators J(λ) ∈ L(X) for each λ ∈ Λ. The family {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} is called a pseudoresolvent if J(λ) − J(µ) = (µ − λ)J(λ)J(µ)

(1.1) holds for all λ, µ ∈ Λ.

The limit operators R(λ) from Example 1.2 form a (trivial) pseudoresolvent for Re λ > 0. However, they are not injective, and therefore they cannot be the resolvent operators R(λ, A) of an operator A. It is our goal, and crucial for the proofs in Section 1.b, to find conditions implying that a pseudoresolvent is indeed a resolvent. Before doing so, we discuss the typical situation in which we encounter pseudoresolvents. 1.4 Proposition. For each n ∈ N, let An be the generator of a semigroup (Tn (t))t≥0 on X satisfying Tn (t) ≤ M for all n ∈ N, t ≥ 0 and some fixed M ≥ 1. Moreover, assume that for some λ0 > 0 lim R(λ0 , An )x

n→∞

exists for all x ∈ X. Then, the limit R(λ)x := lim R(λ, An )x, n→∞

x ∈ X,

exists for all Re λ > 0 and defines a pseudoresolvent R(λ) : Re λ > 0 .


139

Proof. Consider the set Ω := λ ∈ C : Re λ > 0, lim R(λ, An )x exists for all x ∈ X , n→∞

which is nonempty by assumption. As in Proposition V.1.3, one shows that for given µ ∈ Ω one has R(λ, An ) =

∞

(µ − λ)k R(µ, An )k+1

k=0

as long as |µ − λ| < Re µ (use (3.17) from Chapter II). The convergence is with respect to the operator norm and uniform in {λ ∈ C : |µ − λ| ≤ ∞ k M/Re µ α Re µ} for each 0 < α < 1. Because the series k=0 α majorizes ∞ all the series k=0 |µ−λ|k R(µ, An )k+1 , we can conclude that R(λ, An )x converges as n → ∞ for all λ satisfying |µ − λ| ≤ α Re µ. Therefore, the set Ω is open. On the other hand, take an accumulation point λ of Ω with Re λ > 0. For 0 < α < 1, we can find µ ∈ Ω such that |µ − λ| ≤ α Re µ. Hence, by the above considerations, λ must belong to Ω; i.e., Ω is relatively closed in S := {λ ∈ C : Re λ > 0}. The only set satisfying both properties is S itself; hence we obtain the existence of the operators R(λ) for Re λ > 0. Evidently, the resolvent equation (1.1) remains valid for the limit operators. In the subsequent lemma, we state the basic properties of pseudoresolvents. 1.5 Lemma. Let {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} be a pseudoresolvent on X. Then the following properties hold for all λ, µ ∈ Λ. (i) J(λ)J(µ) = J(µ)J(λ). (ii) ker J(λ) = ker J(µ). (iii) rg J(λ) = rg J(µ). Proof. The commutativity (i) follows from the resolvent equation (1.1). If we rewrite it in the form % & % & J(λ) = J(µ) I + (µ − λ)J(λ) = I + (µ − λ)J(λ) J(µ), we see that rg J(λ) ⊆ rg J(µ) and ker J(µ) ⊆ ker J(λ). By symmetry, the assertions (ii) and (iii) follow. If we now require that ker J(λ) = {0} and rg J(λ) is dense, then the pseudoresolvent {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} becomes the resolvent of a closed, densely defined operator.

140


1.6 Proposition. For a pseudoresolvent {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} on X, the following assertions are equivalent. (a) There exists a densely defined, closed operator A, D(A) such that Λ ⊂ ρ(A) and J(λ) = R(λ, A) for all λ ∈ Λ. (b) ker J(λ) = {0}, and rg J(λ) is dense in X for some/all λ ∈ Λ. Proof. We have only to show that (b) implies (a). Because J(λ) is injective, we can define A := λ0 − J(λ0 )−1 for some λ0 ∈ Λ. This yields a closed operator with dense domain D(A) := rg J(λ0 ). From the definition of A, it follows that (λ0 − A)J(λ0 ) = J(λ0 )(λ0 − A) = I; hence J(λ0 ) = R(λ0 , A). For arbitrary λ ∈ Λ, we have % & (λ − A)J(λ) = (λ − λ0 ) + (λ0 − A) J(λ) % & % & = (λ − λ0 ) + (λ0 − A) J(λ0 ) I − (λ − λ0 )J(λ) % & = I + (λ − λ0 ) J(λ0 ) − J(λ) − (λ − λ0 )J(λ)J(λ0 ) = I, and similarly, J(λ)(λ − A) = I. This shows that J(λ) = R(λ, A) for all λ ∈ Λ and, in particular, that A does not depend on the choice of λ0 . We conclude these considerations with some useful sufficient conditions that make a pseudoresolvent a resolvent. 1.7 Corollary. Let {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} be a pseudoresolvent on X and assume that Λ contains an unbounded sequence (λn )n∈N . If (1.2)

lim λn J(λn )x = x for all x ∈ X,

n→∞

then {J(λ) : λ ∈ Λ} is the resolvent of a densely defined operator. In particular, (1.2) holds if rg J(λ) is dense and (1.3)

λn J(λn ) ≤ M

for some constant M and all n ∈ N. Proof. If (1.2) holds, we have X = n∈N rg J(λn ) = rg J(λ), and hence J(λ) has dense range for each λ ∈ Λ. If x ∈ ker J(λ), we obtain x = lim λn J(λn )x = 0; hence ker J(λ) = {0}. The first assertion now follows from Proposition 1.6.(b).


141

From the estimate J(λn ) ≤ |λMn | , n ∈ N, and the resolvent equation, we obtain lim (λn J(λn ) − I)J(µ) = 0 n→∞

for fixed µ ∈ Λ. Therefore, it follows that lim λn J(λn )x = x

n→∞

for x ∈ rg J(µ). Because this is a dense subspace of X, the norm boundedness in (1.3) allows us to conclude that (1.2) holds.

b. The Approximation Theorems We now turn our attention to the approximation problem stated above; i.e., we study the relation among convergence of semigroups, generators, and resolvents. The adequate type of convergence for strongly continuous semigroups (and unbounded operators) is pointwise convergence. If we assume that the limit operator is known to be a generator, we obtain our first main result. However, we need a uniform bound on the semigroups involved. 1.8 First Trotter–Kato Theorem. (Trotter 1958, Approximation Kato 1959). Let T (t) t≥0 and Tn (t) t≥0 , n ∈ N, be strongly continuous semigroups on X with generators A and An , respectively, and assume that they satisfy the estimate T (t) , Tn (t) ≤ M ewt

for all t ≥ 0, n ∈ N,

and some constants M ≥ 1, w ∈ R. Take D to be a core for A and consider the following assertions. (a) D ⊂ D(An ) for all n ∈ N and An x → Ax as n → ∞ for all x ∈ D. (b) For each x ∈ D, there exists xn ∈ D(An ) such that xn → x

and

An xn → Ax

as n → ∞.

(c) R(λ, An )x → R(λ, A)x as n → ∞ for all x ∈ X and some/all λ > w. (d) Tn (t)x → T (t)x as n → ∞ for all x ∈ X, uniformly for t in compact intervals. Then the implications (a) =⇒ (b) ⇐⇒ (c) ⇐⇒ (d) hold, and (b) does not imply (a). Proof. Before starting, we perform a rescaling and assume without loss of generality that w = 0; i.e., T (t) , Tn (t) ≤ M

for all t ≥ 0, n ∈ N.

Because the implication (a) ⇒ (b) is trivial, we start by showing (b) ⇒ (c).

142


Let λ > 0. Because R(λ, An ) ≤ M/λ for all n ∈ N, it suffices to show that lim R(λ, An )y = R(λ, A)y n→∞

for y in the dense subspace (λ − A)D. Take x ∈ D and define y := (λ − A)x. By assumption, there exists xn ∈ D(An ) such that xn → x

An xn → Ax;

and

hence yn := (λ − An )xn → y. Therefore, the estimate R(λ, An )y − R(λ, A)y ≤ R(λ, An )y − R(λ, An )yn + R(λ, An )yn − R(λ, A)y ≤ R(λ, An ) · y − yn + xn − x implies the assertion. The implication (c) ⇒ (b) follows if we take x := R(λ, A)y, and xn := R(λ, An )y for fixed λ > 0 and then observe that An xn = An R(λ, An )y = λR(λ, An )y − y converges to λR(λ, A)y − y = Ax. (d) ⇒ (c). The integral representation of the resolvent yields, for each λ > 0 and x ∈ X, that ∞ R(λ, A)x − R(λ, An )x ≤ e−λt T (t)x − Tn (t)x dt. 0

The desired convergence is now a consequence of Lebesgue’s dominated convergence theorem. To prove the final implication (c) ⇒ (d), we fix some t0 > 0 and assume that R(λ, An )x → R(λ, A)x as n → ∞ for some λ > 0 and all x ∈ X. Then for all t ∈ [0, t0 ] we obtain % & % & Tn (t) − T (t) R(λ, A)x ≤ Tn (t) R(λ, A) − R(λ, An ) x % & + R(λ, An ) Tn (t) − T (t) x % & (1.4) + R(λ, An ) − R(λ, A) T (t)x =: D1 (n, x) + D2 (n, x) + D3 (n, x), where we used the fact that a semigroup commutes with the resolvent of its generator. Because Tn (t) ≤ M for all n ∈ N and t ∈ [0, t0 ], the first term D1 (n, x) → 0 as n → ∞ uniformly on [0, t0 ]. Moreover, because T (t) t≥0 is strongly continuous, the set {T (t)x : t ∈ [0, t0 ]} ⊂ X is compact and hence, by Exercise I.1.8.(1), also D3 (n, x) → 0 as n → ∞ uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ].


143

In order to estimate D2 (n, x) we first show that (1.5)

% & R(λ, An ) T (t)−Tn (t) R(λ, A)z =

t

% & Tn (t−s) R(λ, A)−R(λ, An ) T (s)z ds

0

for every z ∈ X and t > 0. To this end we first observe that, by Lemma A.19, the function [0, t] s → Tn (t − s)R(λ, An )T (s)R(λ, A)z ∈ X is differentiable. Using also Lemma II.1.3.(ii) and (1.1) in Chapter V we obtain % & d ds Tn (t − s)R(λ, An )T (s)R(λ, A)z % & = Tn (t − s) −An R(λ, An )T (s) + R(λ, An )T (s)A R(λ, A)z % & = Tn (t − s) R(λ, A) − R(λ, An ) T (s)z. Integrating the last equation with respect to s from 0 to t then gives (1.5). This implies that % & R(λ, An ) T (t) − Tn (t) R(λ, A)z t % & Tn (t − s) · R(λ, A) − R(λ, An ) T (s)z ds ≤ 0 % & ≤ t0 M · sup R(λ, A) − R(λ, An ) T (s)z . s∈[0,t0 ]

Using the same reasoning as above to prove that D3 (n, x) → 0, we conclude that % & R(λ, An ) T (t) − Tn (t) R(λ, A)z = D2 n, R(λ, A)z → 0 as n → ∞ uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. Because every x ∈ D(A) can be written as x = R(λ, A)z for z = (λ − A)x ∈ X, this shows that for x ∈ D(A) the term D2 (n, x) → 0 as n → ∞ uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. Summing up, we conclude that by inequality (1.4), Tn (t)x − T (t)x → 0

as n → ∞

for all x ∈ D(A2 ), uniformly on [0, t0 ]. Because Tn (t) − T (t) ≤ 2M and D(A2 ) is dense in X by Proposition II.1.8, from Proposition A.3 we finally obtain (d). That (b) does not imply (a) in general can be seen from Counterexample 2.8 below. For the above result we had to assume that the limit operator A is already known to be a generator. This is a major defect, because in the applications one wants to approximate the operator A by (simple) operators An and then conclude that A becomes a generator. Moreover, the semigroup generated by A should be obtained as the limit of the known semigroups generated by the operators An . In fact, we encountered this problem already in the proof (of the nontrivial implication) of Generation Theorem II.3.5. Therefore, the following result can be viewed as a generalization of the Hille–Yosida theorem.

144


1.9 Second Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem. (Trotter 1958, Kato 1959). Let T (t) n t≥0 , n∈ N, be strongly continuous semigroups on X with generators An , D(An ) satisfying the stability condition (1.6)

Tn (t) ≤ M ewt

for constants M ≥ 1, w ∈ R and all t ≥ 0, n ∈ N. For some λ0 > w consider the following assertions. (a) There exists a densely defined operator A, D(A) such that An x → Ax as n → ∞ for all x in a core D of A and such that the range rg(λ0 − A) is dense in X. (b) The operators R(λ0 , An ), n ∈ N, converge strongly as n → ∞ to an operator R ∈ L(X) with dense range rg R. (c) The semigroups Tn (t) t≥0 , n ∈ N, converge strongly (and uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]) as n → ∞ to a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator B such that R = R(λ0 , B). Then the implications (a) ⇒ (b) ⇐⇒ (c) hold. In particular, if (a) holds, then B = A. Proof. Without loss of generality, and after the usual rescaling, it suffices to consider uniformly bounded semigroups only, i.e., the case w = 0. (a) ⇒ (b). As in the above proof, it suffices to show convergence of the sequence R(λ0 , An )y n∈N for y := (λ0 − A)x, x ∈ D, only. This follows, because R(λ0 , An )y = R(λ0 , An )[(λ0 − An )x − (λ0 − An )x + (λ0 − A)x] = x + R(λ0 , An )(An x − Ax) → x = Ry as n → ∞. Moreover, rg R contains D, hence is dense in X. Because the implication (c) ⇒ (b) holds by the above theorem, it remains to prove that (b) ⇒ (c). By Proposition 1.4, we obtain a pseudoresolvent R(λ) : λ > 0 by defining R(λ)x := lim R(λ, An )x, n→∞

x ∈ X.

This pseudoresolvent satisfies, for all λ > 0, λR(λ) ≤ M, and, because R(λ)k = limn→∞ R(λ, An )k , k λ R(λ)k ≤ M for all k ∈ N. Moreover, it has dense range rg R(λ) = rg R. Therefore, Corollary 1.7 yields the existence of a densely defined operator B, D(B) such that


145

R(λ) = R(λ, B) for λ > 0. Moreover, this operator satisfies the Hille– Yosida estimate k λ R(λ, B)k ≤ M for all k ∈ N, hence generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . We can now apply the implication (c) ⇒ (d) from the First Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.8 in order to conclude that the semigroups Tn (t) n≥0 converge—in the desired way—to the semigroup T (t) t≥0 . In the final step, we show that (a) implies A = B. Because R(λ0 , B) = R, we have R(λ0 , B)(λ0 − A)x = x for all x ∈ D. However, D is a core for A, and therefore R(λ0 , B)(λ0 − A)x = x for all x ∈ D(A). From this it follows that λ0 is not an approximate eigenvalue of A. Moreover, rg(λ0 − A) is dense in X by assumption; hence λ0 does not belong to the residual spectrum of A. Therefore, λ0 ∈ ρ(A), and we obtain R(λ0 , A) = R(λ0 , B); i.e., A = B as claimed. The importance of the above theorems cannot be overestimated. In fact, they yield the theoretical background for many approximation schemes in abstract operator theory and applied numerical analysis. However, we restrict ourselves to rather abstract examples and applications.

c. Examples The Hille–Yosida Generation Theorem II.3.8 was the main tool in our proof of the Trotter–Kato approximation theorems. Conversely, this theorem was proved using an approximation argument. It is enlightening to start our series of examples by reformulating this part of the proof. 1.10 Yosida Approximants. Let A, D(A) be an operator on X satisfying the conditions (in the contractive case, for simplicity) from Generation Theorem II.3.5.(b). For each n ∈ N, define the Yosida approximant An := nAR(n, A) ∈ L(X). By Lemma II.3.4, the sequence (An )n∈N converges pointwise on D(A) to A. Because λ−A is already supposed to be surjective, we can apply the Second Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.9 to conclude the existence of the limit semigroup T (t) t≥0 with T (t)x := lim etAn x, and generator A, D(A) .

n→∞

x ∈ X,

146


Clearly, in a logical sense, these arguments do not re-prove the Hille– Yosida generation theorem, which we already used for the proof of the Trotter–Kato approximation theorem. However, it might be helpful for the beginner to observe that the above approximating sequence enjoys a special feature: The operators An , n ∈ N, mutually commute. This property allows a simple and direct proof of the essential step in Approximation Theorem 1.8. Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 and Tn (t) t≥0 , n ∈ N, be strongly continuous semigroups on X with generator A, D(A) and bounded generators An , respectively. In addition, suppose that T (t) t≥0 and Tn (t) t≥0 satisfy the stability condition (1.6) and that An T (t) = T (t)An for all n ∈ N and t > 0. If

An x → Ax

for all x in a core D of A, then Tn (t)x → T (t)x for all x ∈ X uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. Proof. For x ∈ D and n ∈ N, we have t d Tn (t)x − T (t)x = − ds [Tn (t − s)T (s)x] ds 0 t Tn (t − s)(An − A)T (s)x ds = 0 t Tn (t − s)T (s)(An x − Ax) ds; = 0

hence Tn (t)x − T (t)x ≤ tM 2 ewt An x − Ax .

We encounter this situation in our next example, by which we re-prove a classical theorem. 1.11 Weierstrass Approximation Theorem. Take the space function X := C0 (R) (or Cub (R)) and the (left) translation group T (t) t∈R with T (t)f (s) := f (s + t)

for s, t ∈ R

and generator Af := f ,

D(A) := {f ∈ X : f ∈ X}


147

(see Paragraph II.2.9). The bounded operators An :=

T ( 1/n) − I , 1/n

n ∈ N,

• Commute with all operators T (t), • Generate contraction semigroups, because tA 1 1 e n = (1.7) ent(T ( /n)−I) ≤ e−nt entT ( /n) = 1, and • Satisfy, by definition of the derivative, An f → Af for each f ∈ D(A). Therefore, the (First) Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.8 (or the lemma in 1.10) can be applied and yields (1.8)

f (s + t) = lim

n→∞

∞ k t k=0

k!

(Akn f )(s)

for all f ∈ X and uniformly for s ∈ R, t ∈ [0, 1]. If we now take s = 0, choose appropriate sequence (mn )n∈N of natural numbers, and observe an mn tk k that k=0 /k!(An f )(0) is a polynomial, we obtain the Weierstrass approximation theorem as a consequence. Proposition. For every f ∈ X there exists a sequence (mn )n∈N ⊂ N such that (1.9)

f (t) = lim

n→∞

mn k t k=0

k!

(Akn f )(0)

uniformly for t ∈ [0, 1]. It is very instructive to observe how convergence breaks down if we reverse the order of the limit and of the series summation in (1.9). See the illuminating remarks in [Gol85, Sect. I.8.3]. 1.12 A First Approximation Formula. The idea employed in Paragraph 1.11 is very simple and can be formulated in a general context. Let T (t) t≥0 continuous contraction semigroup on X with gen be a strongly erator A, D(A) . Then the bounded operators An :=

T ( 1/n) − I , 1/n

n ∈ N,

approximate A on D(A) and generate contraction semigroups etAn t≥0 (see (1.7)). Therefore, we obtain the following approximation formula.

148


Proposition. With the above definitions, one has (1.10)

T (t)x = lim e−nt entT ( n→∞

1/ ) n

x

for all x ∈ X and uniformly in t ∈ [0, t0 ]. This formula might seem useless, because it assumes that the operators T (t) are already known, at least for small t > 0. However, it is the first step towards more interesting approximation formulas to be developed in the next section. 1.13 Exercises. (1) Consider the operator Af := f with maximal domain on X := C0 (R). For each n ∈ N, we define bounded difference operators % & An f (s) := n2 f (s + 1/n) − 2f (s) + f (s − 1/n) ,

s ∈ R, f ∈ X.

Prove the following statements. (i) A, D(A) is a closed, densely defined operator. (ii) etAn ≤ 1 for each n ∈ N, and An f → Af for f ∈ D(A). (iii) For each g ∈ X, there exists a unique f ∈ D(A) such that f −f = g. (Hint: Use the formal identity (I − ( d/ds)2 )−1 = (I − d/ds)−1 (I + d/ds)−1 and the resolvent formula for d/ds from Proposition 2 in Paragraph II.2.9. Check that this yields the correct solution.) (iv) A, D(A) generates the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 given by T (t)f (s) = lim e−2n n→∞

2

t

∞ k (n2 t)k k l f s+ k!

k=0

(k−2l)/n

l=0

for s ∈ R, f ∈ X. (2) What happens in Exercise I.2.15.(1) as α ↓ 0?

2. The Chernoff Product Formula As announced in the previous section, it is now our aim to obtain more or less explicit formulas for the semigroup operators T (t). These formulas are based on some knowledge of the generator (and its resolvent) and the Trotter–Kato approximation theorem. Our first approach is via the Chernoff product formula, from which many approximation formulas can be derived. For its proof the following estimate is essential.

Section 2. The Chernoff Product Formula

149

2.1 Lemma. Let S ∈ L(X) satisfy S m ≤ M for some M ≥ 1 and all m ∈ N. Then we have √ n(S−I) (2.1) x − S n x ≤ nM Sx − x e for every n ∈ N and x ∈ X. Proof. Let n ∈ N be fixed and observe that ∞ nk k S − Sn . en(S−I) − S n = e−n enS − en S n = e−n k! k=0

For k > n, we write Sk − Sn =

k−1

k−1 S j (S − I), S j+1 − S j =

j=n

j=n

and similarly for k < n. Therefore, and because S m ≤ M , we obtain k S x − S n x ≤ |n − k| · M Sx − x for all k ∈ N, x ∈ X. This allows the estimate ∞ k 1/2 k 1/2 n n n(S−I) n −n x − S x ≤ e M Sx − x · |n − k| e k! k! k=0 - 1/2 , ∞ - 1/2 ,∞ nk nk −n 2 ≤ e M Sx − x · (n − k) k! k! k=0 n 1/2

−n

= e M Sx − x · (e ) √ = nM Sx − x ,

k=0

n

(ne )

1/ 2

where we used the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and the identity ∞ nk k=0

k!

(n − k)2 = nen .

This lemma, combined with Approximation Theorem 1.9, yields the main result of this section.

150


2.2 Theorem. (Chernoff Product Formula). Consider a function V : R+ → L(X) % & satisfying V (0) = I and V (t) m ≤ M for all t ≥ 0, m ∈ N, and some M ≥ 1. Assume that V (h)x − x Ax := lim h↓0 h exists for all x ∈ D ⊂ X, where D and (λ0 − A)D are dense subspaces in X for some λ0 > 0. Then the closure A of A generates a bounded strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , which is given by (2.2)

n

T (t)x = lim [V ( t/n)] x n→∞

for all x ∈ X and uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. Proof. For s > 0, define As :=

V (s) − I ∈ L(X), s

and observe that As x → Ax for all x ∈ D as s ↓ 0. The semigroups (etAs )t≥0 all satisfy % & ∞ tA tm V (s) m tV (s)/ −t/ s s e s ≤ e −t/s ≤ M for every t ≥ 0. e ≤e sm m! m=0 This shows that the assumptions of the Second Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.9 are fulfilled (with the discrete parameter n ∈ N replaced by the continuous parameter s > 0). Hence, the closure A of A generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfying T (t)x − etAs x → 0 for all x ∈ X as s ↓ 0 uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ], and therefore tA (2.3) for all x ∈ X as n → ∞ T (t)x − e t/n x → 0 uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. On the other hand, we have by Lemma 2.1 that t tA t/n n n x − [V ( t/n)] x = en(V ( /n)−I) x − [V ( t/n)] x e √ ≤ nM V ( t/n)x − x (2.4) tM = √ A t/n x → 0 n tA n for all x ∈ D as n → ∞, uniformly on (0, t0 ]. Because e t/n −[V ( t/n)] ≤ 2M , the combination of (2.3), (2.4), and Proposition A.3 yields (2.2).


151

As before, we pass to the unbounded case by a rescaling procedure. 2.3 Corollary. Consider a function V : R+ → L(X) satisfying V (0) = I and [V (t)]k ≤ M ekwt

for all t ≥ 0, k ∈ N

and some constants M ≥ 1, w ∈ R. Assume that Ax := lim t↓0

V (t)x − x t

exists for all x ∈ D ⊂ X, where D and (λ0 − A)D are dense subspaces in X for some λ0 > w. Then the closure A of A generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 given by (2.5)

T (t)x = lim [V ( t/n)]n x n→∞

for all x ∈ X and uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. Moreover, T (t) t≥0 satisfies the estimate T (t) ≤ M ewt for all t ≥ 0. Proof. From the function V (·) we pass to V) (t) := e−wt V (t), which then satisfies ) k V (t) ≤ M

for all k ∈ N and t ≥ 0

and whose derivative in zero is the operator A − w. The assertions then follow from Theorem 2.2. Next, we substitute the “time steps” of size “ t/n” in the definition of the approximating operators V ( t/n) by an arbitrary null sequence (tn )n∈N . 2.4 Corollary. Let V : R+ → L(X) satisfy the assumptions in Corollary 2.3. If for fixed t > 0 we take a positive null sequence (tn )n∈N ∈ c0 and a strictly increasing sequence of integers kn such that kn tn → t, then (2.6) for all x ∈ X.

T (t)x = lim [V (tn )]kn x n→∞

152


Proof. Using the function s · (tn kn )/t for s ∈ ( t/kn+1 , t/kn ], ξ(s) := 0 for s = 0 or s > t/k1 , we introduce a new operator-valued function W : R+ → L(X) by W (t) := V ξ(t) , t ≥ 0. This function still satisfies W (0) = I and W (t)k ≤ M ekwt for all t ≥ 0, k ∈ N. For x ∈ D, we show that lim t↓0

W (t)x − x = Ax. t

Let (tn )n∈N ∈ c0 be an arbitrary null sequence and for each tm choose nm ∈ N such that tm ∈ ( t/knm +1 , t/knm ]. Then V ξ(tm ) x − x ξ(tm ) W (tm )x − x · = tm ξ(tm ) tm V ξ(tm ) x − x tnm knm · tm = ; · ξ(tm ) t · tm hence lim

m→∞

W (tm )x − x tnm knm = Ax. = Ax · lim m→∞ tm t

By Corollary 2.3, we conclude that A generates the semigroup T (t) t≥0 given by T (t)x = lim [W ( t/n)]n x n→∞

uniformly for t ∈ [0, t0 ]. In particular, we obtain for the subsequence ( t/kn )n∈N that k

T (t)x = lim [W ( t/kn )] n x n→∞ % &kn x = lim V ξ( t/kn ) n→∞ % &kn = lim V (tn ) x for all x ∈ X. n→∞

The following application of the Chernoff Product Formula Theorem 2.2 (or of Corollary 2.3) finally gives us an explicit formula, called the Post– Widder Inversion Formula, for the semigroup in terms of the resolvent of its generator. This adds a missing arrow to the “triangle” from Diagram II.1.14, and, at the same time, corresponds to Hille’s original proof of Generation Theorem II.3.5.


153

2.5 Corollary. For every strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X with generator A, D(A) , one has (2.7)

−n

n

T (t)x = lim [ n/tR( n/t, A)] x = lim [I − t/nA] n→∞

n→∞

x,

x ∈ X,

uniformly for t in compact intervals. Proof. Assume that T (t) ≤ M ewt for constants M ≥ 1, w > 0 and define I for t = 0, V (t) := 1/t R( 1/t, A) for t ∈ (0, δ), 0 for t ≥ δ, for some δ ∈ (0, 1/w). In this way we obtain a function V : R+ → L(X) satisfying V (t)k ≤ 1/tk R( 1/t, A)k ≤

M M = ≤ M ek(w+1)t k − w) (1 − wt)k

tk ( 1/t

for all t ∈ (0, δ), provided that we choose δ > 0 sufficiently small. Moreover, by Lemma II.3.4, we have lim t↓0

V (t)x − x = lim 1/tR( 1/t, A)Ax = Ax t↓0 t

if x ∈ D(A).

Therefore, the Chernoff product formula as stated in Corollary 2.3 applies, and (2.5) becomes the above formula. For the sake of completeness, we add this new relation to the diagram relating the semigroup, its generator, and its resolvent operators. 2.6 Diagram.

Ax=lim t↓0

A, D(A)

T (t)x−x t

T (t) t≥0

@ I @ @ @ @ @ @ R(λ,A)=∞ e−λt T (t) dt @ @ @ 0 T (t)= lim [ n/tR( n/t,A)]n @ @ n→∞ @ @ @ @ @ @ R @ @ R(λ,A)=(λ−A)−1 - R(λ, A) λ∈ρ(A) −1 A=λ−R(λ,A)

We now apply the Chernoff product formula from Theorem 2.2 to perturbation theory yielding another important formula, called the Trotter product formula, for the perturbed semigroup. In contrast to the situation studied in Sections III.1 and 2, we obtain a result that is symmetric in the operators A and B.

154


2.7 Corollary. Let T (t) t≥0 and S(t) t≥0 be strongly continuous semigroups on X satisfying the stability condition n

[T ( t/n)S( t/n)] ≤ M ewt

(2.8)

for all t ≥ 0, n ∈ N,

and for constants M ≥ 1, w ∈ R. Consider A + B on D := the “sum” D(A) ∩ D(B) of the generators A, D(A) of T (t) and B, D(B) of t≥0 S(t) t≥0 , and assume that D and (λ0 − A − B)D are dense in X for some λ 0 > w. Then C := A + B generates a strongly continuous semigroup U (t) t≥0 given by the Trotter product formula n

(2.9)

U (t)x = lim [T ( t/n)S( t/n)] x, n→∞

x ∈ X,

with uniform convergence for t in compact intervals. Proof. In order to apply the Chernoff product formula from Corollary 2.3, it suffices to define V (t) := T (t)S(t), t ≥ 0, and observe that lim t↓0

T (t)S(t)y − y T (t)y − y S(t)y − y = lim T (t) + lim t↓0 t↓0 t t t = By + Ay

for all y ∈ D.

We now show first that the density of D(A) ∩ D(B) is not necessary for the convergence (to a strongly continuous semigroup) of the Trotter Product Formula (2.9) and second that the converse of the implication (a) ⇒ (b) in the First Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.8 does not hold. 2.8 Counterexample. On X := L2 (R) we take the right translation semi group T (t) t≥0 with generator A (see I.3.c and Paragraph II.2.9) Section and the multiplication semigroup S(t) t≥0 generated by B = Miq for q : R → R a measurable and locally integrable function. For f ∈ X we can compute (cf. [EN00, (5.16) in Expl. III.5.9]) the products

n n t t kt t [T ( /n)S( /n)] f (s) = exp i q (s − /n) /n ·f (s−t) for t ≥ 0, s ∈ R. k=1

They converge in L2 -norm to U (t)f with s i q(τ ) dτ U (t)f (s) := e s−t · f (s − t). These operators U (t) form a strongly continuous semigroup (of isometries) on X. Observe that no assumption on D(A) ∩ D(B) was made.


155

In fact, this intersection can be {0}. Take Q = {αk : k ∈ N} and define q(s) :=

∞ 1 −1 |s − αk | /2 k!

for s ∈ R.

k=1

/ L2 [a, b] for any a < b. Therefore, no Then q ∈ L1loc (R). However, q ∈ continuous function f = 0 belongs to D(B); hence D(A) ∩ D(B) = 0. However, at least formally, the generator C of U (t) t≥0 is the “sum” A+B. In fact, one can show that the domain of C is D(C) = f ∈ L2 (R) : f is absolutely continuous and − f + qf ∈ L2 (R) and

Cf = −f + qf

for f ∈ D(C).

Using the same q, we now define semigroups on X by s i/ q(τ ) dτ n s− t(n+1)/n Un (t)f (s) := e · f (s − t(n+1)/n) for every n ∈ N. Then limn→∞ Un (t)f = T (t)f for every f ∈ X, and the semigroups Un (t) t≥0 and the right translation semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfy the equivalent conditions (b), (c), and (d) in the First Trotter–Kato Approximation Theorem 1.8. However, the intersections of the respective domains are trivial; hence condition (a) does not hold. 2.9 Exercise. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on a Banach space X. If B ∈ L(X), then the semigroup U (t) t≥0 generated by A + B is given by the Trotter product formula % tB & U (t)x = lim T ( t/n)e /n n x n→∞

for all t ≥ 0 and x ∈ X. (Hint: By renorming X as in Chapter II, (3.18) (or by Lemma II.3.10) one may assume that T (t) t≥0 is a contraction semigroup. To verify the stability condition (2.8) observe that etB ≤ etB .)

Chapter V Spectral Theory and Asymptotics for Semigroups

Up to now, our main concern was to show that strongly continuous semigroups have a generator (with nice properties) and, conversely, that certain operators generate strongly continuous semigroups (with nice properties). In the perspective of Section II.6 this means that certain evolution equations have unique solutions, hence are well-posed. Having established this kind of well-posedness, that is, the existence of a strongly continuous semigroup, we now turn our attention to the qualitative behavior of these solutions, i.e., of these semigroups. Our main tool for this investigation is provided by spectral theory. This is already evident from the Hille–Yosida theorem (and its variants), where generators were characterized by the location of their spectrum and by norm estimates of the resolvent. Moreover, the classical Liapunov Stabil ity Theorem for matrix semigroups etA t≥0 characterizes the stability, i.e., limt→∞ etA = 0, by the location of the eigenvalues of A (see Theorem 3.6 below). In order to continue in this direction, we first develop a spectral theory for semigroups and their generators. The importance of these techniques becomes evident in Section 3, where we apply it to the study of the asymptotic behavior of strongly continuous semigroups. We start with an introductory section, in which we explain the basic spectral theoretic notions and results for general closed operators. Because many of these notions have already been used in the preceding chapters, the reader may skip (most of) this section.

156

Section 1. Spectrum of Semigroups and Generators

157

1. Spectrum of Semigroups and Generators a. Spectral Theory for Closed Operators The guiding idea of spectral theory is to associate numbers with linear operators in the hope of recovering properties of the operator from these numbers. So let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be a closed linear operator on some Banach space X. Note that we do not assume a dense domain, whereas the closedness is essential for a reasonable spectral theory. 1.1 Definition. We call ρ(A) := λ ∈ C : λ − A : D(A) → X is bijective the resolvent set and its complement σ(A) := C \ ρ(A) the spectrum of A. For λ ∈ ρ(A), the inverse R(λ, A) := (λ − A)−1 is, by the closed graph theorem, a bounded operator on X and is called the resolvent (of A at the point λ). It follows immediately from the definition that the identity (1.1)

AR(λ, A) = λR(λ, A) − I

holds for every λ ∈ ρ(A). The next identity is the reason for many of the nice properties of the resolvent set ρ(A) and the resolvent map ρ(A) λ → R(λ, A) ∈ L(X). 1.2 Resolvent Equation. For λ, µ ∈ ρ(A), one has (1.2)

R(λ, A) − R(µ, A) = (µ − λ)R(λ, A)R(µ, A).

Proof. The definition of the resolvent implies and

[λR(λ, A) − AR(λ, A)]R(µ, A) = R(µ, A) R(λ, A)[µR(µ, A) − AR(µ, A)] = R(λ, A).

If we subtract these equations and use the fact that R(λ, A) and R(µ, A) commute, we obtain (1.2). The basic properties of the resolvent set and the resolvent map are now collected in the following proposition.

158

Chapter V. Spectral Theory and Asymptotics for Semigroups

1.3 Proposition. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X, the following properties hold. (i) The resolvent set ρ(A) is open in C, and for µ ∈ ρ(A) one has ∞ (µ − λ)n R(µ, A)n+1 (1.3) R(λ, A) = n=0

for all λ ∈ C satisfying |µ − λ| < 1/R(µ,A). (ii) The resolvent map λ → R(λ, A) is locally analytic with (1.4)

dn dλn R(λ, A)

= (−1)n n! R(λ, A)n+1

for all n ∈ N.

(iii) Let λn ∈ ρ(A) with lim λn = λ0 . Then λ0 ∈ σ(A) if and only if n→∞

lim R(λn , A) = ∞.

n→∞

Proof. (i) For λ ∈ C write λ − A = µ − A + λ − µ = [I − (µ − λ)R(µ, A)](µ − A). This operator is bijective if [I − (µ − λ)R(µ, A)] is invertible, which is the case for |µ − λ| < 1/R(µ,A). The inverse is then obtained as ∞ R(λ, A) = R(µ, A)[I − (µ − λ)R(µ, A)]−1 = (µ − λ)n R(µ, A)n+1 . n=0

Assertion (ii) follows immediately from the series representation (1.3) for the resolvent. To show (iii) we use (i), which implies R(µ, A) ≥ 1/dist(µ,σ(A)) for all µ ∈ ρ(A). This already proves one implication. For the converse, assume that λ0 ∈ ρ(A). Then the continuous resolvent map remains bounded on the compact set {λn : n ≥ 0}. This contradicts the assumption that limn→∞ R(λn , A) = ∞; hence λ0 ∈ σ(A). As an immediate consequence, we have that the spectrum σ(A) is a closed subset of C. Nothing more can be said in general (see the examples below). However, if A is bounded, it follows that σ(A) ⊂ {λ ∈ C : |λ| ≤ A }, because R(λ, A) =

1 λ

1−

A λ

−1 =

∞ An λn+1 n=0

exists for all |λ| > A . In addition, an application of Liouville’s theorem to the resolvent map implies σ(A) = ∅ (see [TL80, Chap. V, Thm. 3.2]). 1.4 Corollary. For a bounded operator A on a Banach space X, the spectrum σ(A) is always compact and nonempty; hence its spectral radius 1 r(A) := sup |λ| : λ ∈ σ(A) = lim An /n n→∞

is finite and satisfies r(A) ≤ A .


159

The above formula for the spectral radius is called the Hadamard formula because it resembles the well-known Hadamard formula for the radius of convergence of a power series. For its proof we refer to [TL80, Chap. V, Thm. 3.5] or [Yos65, XIII.2, Thm. 3]. Before proceeding with a more detailed analysis of σ(A), we show by some simple examples that for unbounded operators σ(A) can be any closed subset of C. 1.5 Examples. (i) On X := C[0, 1] take the differential operators Ai f := f with domain

for i = 1, 2

D(A1 ) := C1 [0, 1] and D(A2 ) := f ∈ C1 [0, 1] : f (1) = 0 .

Then σ(A1 ) = C, because for each λ ∈ C one has (λ − A1 )ελ = 0 for ελ := eλs , 0 ≤ s ≤ 1. On the other hand, σ(A2 ) = ∅, because

1

eλ(s−t) f (t) dt,

Rλ f (s) :=

0 ≤ s ≤ 1, f ∈ X,

s

yields the inverse of (λ − A2 ) for every λ ∈ C. (ii) Take any nonempty, closed subset Ω ⊂ C. On the space X := C0 (Ω) consider the multiplication operator M f (λ) := λ · f (λ) for λ ∈ Ω, f ∈ X. From Proposition I.3.2 we obtain that σ(M ) = Ω.

As a next step, we look at the fine structure of the spectrum. We start with a particularly important subset of σ(A). 1.6 Definition. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X, we call P σ(A) := {λ ∈ C : λ − A is not injective} the point spectrum of A. Moreover, each λ ∈ P σ(A) is called an eigenvalue, and each 0 = x ∈ D(A) satisfying (λ − A)x = 0 is an eigenvector of A (corresponding to λ).

160


In most cases, the eigenvalues of an operator are simpler to determine than arbitrary spectral values. However, they do not, in general, exhaust the entire spectrum. 1.7 Examples. (i) For the operator A1 in Example 1.5.(i), one has σ(A1 ) = P σ(A1 ) = C. (ii) In contrast, for the multiplication operator M in Example 1.5.(ii) one has σ(M ) = Ω, but P σ(M ) = {λ ∈ C : λ is isolated in Ω}. As a variant of the point spectrum, we introduce the following larger subset of σ(A). 1.8 Definition. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X, we call Aσ(A) :=

λ∈C:

λ − A is not injective or rg(λ − A) is not closed in X

the approximate point spectrum of A. The inclusion P σ(A) ⊂ Aσ(A) is evident from the definition, but the reason for calling it “approximate point spectrum” is not. This is explained by the next lemma. 1.9 Lemma. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X and a number λ ∈ C one has λ ∈ Aσ(A); i.e., λ is an approximate eigenvalue, if and only if there exists a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A), called an approximate eigenvector , such that xn = 1 and limn→∞ Axn − λxn = 0. Proof. We only have to consider the case in which λ − A is injective. As usual, we denote by X1 := D(A), · A ) the first Sobolev space for A; cf. Section II.2.c. Then the inverse (λ − A)−1 : rg(λ − A) → X1 exists and, by the closed graph theorem, is unbounded if and only if rg(λ−A) is not closed. On the other hand, if (λ−A)−1 : rg(λ−A) → X is bounded, the closedness of A implies the closedness of rg(λ − A). Hence (λ − A)−1 : X → X1 is unbounded if and only if (λ − A)−1 : X → X is unbounded, and this property can be expressed by the condition above. The approximate point spectrum generalizes the point spectrum. However, as we show in the following corollary, it has the advantage that it can be empty only if σ(A) = ∅ or σ(A) = C. 1.10 Proposition. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X, the topological boundary ∂σ(A) of the spectrum σ(A) is contained in the approximate point spectrum Aσ(A).


161

Proof. For each λ0 ∈ ∂σ(A) ⊆ σ(A) we can find a sequence (λn )n∈N ⊂ ρ(A) such that λn → λ0 . By Proposition 1.3.(iii), using the uniform boundedness principle and passing to a subsequence, we find x ∈ X such that limn→∞ R(λn , A)x = ∞. Define yn ∈ D(A) by yn :=

R(λn , A)x . R(λn , A)x

The identity (λ0 − A)yn = (λ0 − λn )yn + (λn − A)yn shows that (yn ) is an approximate eigenvector corresponding to λ0 .

The remaining part of the spectrum is now taken care of by the following definition. 1.11 Definition. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X, we call Rσ(A) := {λ ∈ C : rg(λ − A) is not dense in X} the residual spectrum of A. All possibilities for λ − A not being bijective are now covered by Definitions 1.8 and 1.11, and hence σ(A) = Aσ(A) ∪ Rσ(A). However, there is no reason for the union to be disjoint. It is easy to find examples by applying the following very useful dual characterization of Rσ(A). Note that we now need a dense domain in order to define the adjoint operator (see Definition A.12). 1.12 Proposition. For a closed, densely defined operator A, the residual spectrum Rσ(A) coincides with the point spectrum P σ(A ) of A . Proof. The closure of rg(λ − A) is different from X if and only if there exists a linear form 0 = x ∈ X vanishing on rg(λ − A). By the definition of A , this means x ∈ D(A ) and (λ − A )x = 0. In the next theorem we show that for each λ0 ∈ ρ(A) there is a canonical relation, called the spectral mapping theorem, between the spectrum of the unbounded operator A and the spectrum of the bounded operator R(λ0 , A). This allows us to transfer results from the spectral theory of bounded operators to the unbounded case. 1.13 Spectral Mapping Theorem for the Resolvent. Let A : D(A) ⊆ X → X be a closed operator with nonempty resolvent set ρ(A). (i) σ R(λ0 , A) \ {0} = λ0 − σ(A) −1 := λ01−µ : µ ∈ σ(A) for each λ0 ∈ ρ(A). (ii) Analogous statements hold for the point, approximate point, and residual spectra of A and R(λ0 , A).

162


Proof. For 0 = µ ∈ C and λ0 ∈ ρ(A) we have % & µ − R(λ0 , A) x = µ (λ0 − µ1 ) − A R(λ0 , A)x % & = µR(λ0 , A) (λ0 − µ1 ) − A x

for x ∈ X, for x ∈ D(A).

This identity shows that % & ker µ − R(λ0 , A) = ker (λ0 − µ1 ) − A and % & rg µ − R(λ0 , A) = rg (λ0 − µ1 ) − A . Recalling Definitions 1.6, 1.8,and 1.11 for the various parts of the spectrum, we see that µ ∈ P σ R(λ0 , A) if and only if (λ0 − 1/µ) ∈ P σ(A) and similarly for the approximate point spectrum and the residual spectrum. This proves assertion (ii), and hence (i). This relation between σ(A) and σ R(λ0 , A) determines the spectral radius of R(λ0 , A). 1.14 Corollary. For each λ0 ∈ ρ(A) one has (1.5)

1 1 ≥ . dist λ0 , σ(A) = R(λ0 , A) r R(λ0 , A)

The Spectral Mapping Theorem for the Resolvent combined with the Riesz–Schauder theory for compact operators, cf. [TL80, Sect. V.7], [Yos65, X.5], or [Lan93, Chap. XVII], gives the following result. It states that, as in finite dimensions, for resolvent compact operators (cf. Definition II.5.7) the spectrum and the point spectrum coincide. 1.15 Corollary. If the operator A has compact resolvent, then σ(A) = P σ(A). We now study so-called spectral decompositions, which are one of the most important features of spectral theory. First, we recall briefly their construction in the bounded case (see, e.g., [DS58, Sect. VII.3], [GGK90, I.2], or [TL80, Sect. V.9]). Let T ∈ L(X) be a bounded operator and assume that the spectrum σ(T ) can be decomposed as (1.6)

σ(T ) = σc ∪ σu ,

where σc , σu are closed and disjoint sets. From the functional calculus (already used in Section I.2.b) one obtains the associated spectral projection

(1.7)

P := Pc :=

1 2πi

R(λ, T ) dλ, γ


163

where γ is a Jordan path in the complement of σu and enclosing σc . This projection commutes with T and yields the spectral decomposition X = Xc ⊕ Xu with the T -invariant spaces Xc := rg P , Xu := ker P . The restrictions Tc ∈ L(Xc ) and Tu ∈ L(Xu ) of T satisfy (1.8)

σ(Tc ) = σc and σ(Tu ) = σu ,

a property that characterizes the above decomposition of X and T in a unique way. For unbounded operators A and an arbitrary decomposition of the spectrum σ(A) into closed sets it is not always possible to find an associated spectral decomposition (for counterexamples see [EN00, Exer. IV.2.30] or [Nag86, A-III, Expl. 3.2]). However, if one of these sets is compact, the spectral mapping theorem for the resolvent allows us to deduce the result from the bounded case. To prove this, we first need the following lemma. 1.16 Lemma. Let Y be a Banach space continuously embedded in X. If λ ∈ ρ(A) such that R(λ, A)Y ⊂ Y , then λ ∈ ρ(A| ) and R(λ, A| ) = R(λ, A)| . Proof. By the definition of D(A| ) and because R(λ, A)Y ⊆ Y , we already know that R(λ, A)| maps Y onto D(A| ) and therefore is the algebraic inverse of λ − A| . To show that it is bounded in Y , it suffices to observe that it is a closed, everywhere defined operator. 1.17 Proposition. Let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be a closed operator such that its spectrum σ(A) can be decomposed into the disjoint union of two closed subsets σc and σu ; i.e., σ(A) = σc ∪ σu . If σc is compact, then there exists a unique spectral decomposition X = Xc ⊕ Xu for A in the following sense. (i) Xc and Xu are A-invariant. (ii) The restriction Ac := A|Xc is bounded on the Banach space Xc . A u (iii) X1A = Xc ⊕ (Xu )A 1 , where Au := A|Xu (and X1 denotes the first Sobolev space with respect to A as introduced in Exercise II.2.22.(1)). (iv) A = Ac ⊕ Au . (v) σ(Ac ) = σc and σ(Au ) = σu . (vi) If X = X1 ⊕ X2 for two A-invariant closed subspaces X1 and X2 of X such that A|X1 is bounded, σ(A|X1 ) = σc and σ(A|X2 ) = σu , then X1 = Xc and X2 = Xu .

164


Proof. When A is bounded, we have already indicated a proof based on Formula (1.7). Therefore, we may assume A to be unbounded and fix some λ ∈ ρ(A). Then 0 ∈ σ(R(λ, A)). Hence, by Theorem 1.13, we obtain . (λ − σu )−1 ∪ {0} σ R(λ, A) = (λ − σc )−1 (1.9) =: τc ∪ τu , where τc , τu are compact and disjoint subsets of C. Now let P be the spectral projection for R(λ, A) associated with the decomposition (1.9) and put Xc := rg P , Xu := ker P . Because R(λ, A) and P commute, we have R(λ, A)Xc ⊆ Xc , and Lemma 1.16 implies (1.10)

λ ∈ ρ(Ac )

and

(1.11)

λ ∈ ρ(Au )

and

R(λ, Ac ) = R(λ, A)|Xc . Moreover, we know that σ R(λ, Ac ) = τc 0. Therefore, the operator Ac = λ − R(λ, Ac )−1 is bounded on Xc and we obtain (ii). To show (i) we observe that Xc ⊆ D(A) and AXc = Ac Xc ⊆ Xc ; i.e., Xc is A-invariant. Because A(I − P )x = (I − P )Ax for x ∈ D(A), also Xu = rg(I − P ) is A-invariant. To verify (iii), observe that by similar arguments as above we obtain R(λ, Au ) = R(λ, A)|Xu .

Combining this with (1.10) yields Xc + D(Au ) = R(λ, Ac )Xc + R(λ, Au )Xu ⊆ D(A) = R(λ, A)(Xc + Xu ) ⊆ R(λ, Ac )Xc + R(λ, Au )Xu = Xc + D(Au ); i.e., X1A = Xc + D(Au ). Because P ∈ L(X), the restriction P|X1A : X1A → X1A is closed and therefore bounded by the closed graph theorem. This proves (iii), and assertion (iv) then follows from (ii) and (iii). Finally, (v) is a consequence of the Spectral Mapping Theorem 1.13 and (1.9), (1.10), (1.11), and (vi) follows from Theorem 1.13 and the uniqueness of the spectral decomposition for bounded operators; see [GGK90, Prop. I.2.4]. 1.18 Isolated Singularities. We now sketch a particularly important case of the above decomposition that occurs when σc = {µ} consists of a single point only. This means that µ is isolated in σ(A) and therefore the holomorphic function λ → R(λ, A) can be expanded as a Laurent series R(λ, A) =

∞

(λ − µ)n Un

n=−∞


165

for 0 < |λ − µ| < δ and some sufficiently small δ > 0. The coefficients Un of this series are bounded operators given by the formulas (1.12)

1 Un = 2πi

γ

R(λ, A) dλ, (λ − µ)n+1

n ∈ Z,

where γ is, for example, the positively oriented boundary of the disc with radius δ/2 centered at µ. The coefficient U−1 is exactly the spectral projection P corresponding to the decomposition σ(A) = {µ} ∪ (σ(A) \ {µ}) of the spectrum of A (cf. (1.7)). It is called the residue of R(·, A) at µ. From (1.12) (or using the multiplicativity of the functional calculus in [TL80, Thm. V.8.1]), one deduces the identities (1.13)

U−(n+1) = (A − µ)n P

and

U−(n+1) · U−(m+1) = U−(n+m+1)

for n, m ≥ 0. If there exists k > 0 such that U−k = 0 and U−n = 0 for all n > k, then the spectral value µ is called a pole of R(·, A) of order k. In view of (1.13), this is true if and only if U−k = 0 and U−(k+1) = 0. Moreover, we can obtain U−k as U−k = lim (λ − µ)k R(λ, A). λ→µ

The dimension of the spectral subspace rg P is called the algebraic multiplicity ma of µ, and mg := dim ker(µ − A) is the geometric multiplicity. In the case ma = 1, we call µ an algebraically simple (or first-order ) pole. If k is the order of the pole, where we set k = ∞ if R(·, A) has an essential singularity at µ, one can show the inequalities (1.14)

mg + k − 1 ≤ ma ≤ mg · k

if we put ∞ · 0 := ∞. This implies that (i) ma < ∞ if and only if µ is a pole with mg < ∞, and (ii) if µ is a pole of order k, then µ ∈ P σ(A) and rg P = ker(µ − A)k . For proofs of these facts we refer to [GGK90, Chap. II], [Kat80, III.5], [TL80, V.10], or [Yos65, VIII.8]. 1.19 The Essential Spectrum. As we already mentioned above, spectral decomposition is a powerful method to split an operator on a Banach space into two, it is hoped simpler, parts acting on invariant subspaces. In this paragraph we present the tools for a decomposition in which one of these subspaces is finite-dimensional. The results are used in Sections 4, VI.3, and VI.4. We start with the following notion.

166


An operator S ∈ L(X) on a Banach space X is called a Fredholm operator if dim ker S < ∞

and

dim X/rg S < ∞.

For T ∈ L(X), we then define its Fredholm domain ρF (T ) by ρF (T ) := λ ∈ C : λ − T is a Fredholm operator , and call its complement σess (T ) := C \ ρF (T ) the essential spectrum of the operator T . One can show (see for instance [GGK90, Chap. XI, Thm. 5.1]) that (1.15) there exists T ∈ L(X) such that S is a Fredholm operator ⇐⇒ I − T S and I − ST are compact. Using this fact, an equivalent characterization of σess (T ) is obtained through the Calkin algebra C(X) := L(X)/K(X), where K(X) stands for the twosided closed ideal in L(X) of all compact operators. In fact, C(X) equipped with the quotient norm T$ := dist T, K(X) = inf T − K : K ∈ K(X) for T$ := T + K(X) ∈ C(X) is a Banach algebra with unit. Then, by the equivalence in (1.15), we have

and

ρF (T ) = ρ(T$) σess (T ) = σ(T$)

for all T ∈ L(X), where the spectrum of T$ is defined in the Banach algebra C(X) (see [CPY74, Chap. 1]). In particular, this implies that σess (T ) is closed and, if X is infinite-dimensional, nonempty. In the sequel, we also use the notation

and

T ess : = T$

ress (T ) : = r(T$) = sup |λ| : λ ∈ σess (T )

for the essential norm and the essential spectral radius, respectively, of the operator T . Because T ess = T + K ess for every compact operator K on X, we have ress (T + K) = ress (T )


167

for all K ∈ K(X). Moreover, using the Hadamard formula for the spectral radius of T$, cf. Corollary 1.4, we obtain the equality 1

/n . ress (T ) = lim T n ess n→∞

For a detailed analysis of the essential spectrum of an operator, we refer to [Kat80, Sect. IV.5.6], [GGK90, Chap. XVII], or [Gol66, Sect. IV.2]. Here, we only recall that the poles of R(·, T ) with finite algebraic multiplicity belong to ρF (T ). Conversely, an element of the unbounded connected component of ρF (T ) either belongs to ρ(T ) or is a pole of finite algebraic multiplicity. Thus ress (T ) can be characterized by each λ ∈ σ(T ) satisfying |λ| > r is a pole . (1.16) ress (T ) = inf r > 0 : of R(·, T ) of finite algebraic multiplicity 1.20 Exercises. (1) Let A be a complex n × n matrix. Show that for λ ∈ σ(A) (i) The pole order of R(·, A) in λ, (ii) The size of the largest Jordan block of A corresponding to λ, (iii) The multiplicity of λ as zero of the minimal polynomial mA of A coincide. (2) Compute the spectrum σ(A) for the following operators on the Banach space X := C[0, 1]. 1 (i) Af := s(1−s) · f (s), D(A) := {f ∈ X : Af ∈ X}. (ii) Bf (s) := is2 · f (s), D(B) := X. (iii) Cf (s) := f (s), D(C) := {C1 [0, 1] : f (0) = 0}. (iv) Df (s) := f (s), D(D) := {f ∈ C1 [0, 1] : f (1) = 0}. (v) Ef (s) := f (s), D(E) := {f ∈ C1 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1)}. (vi) F f (s) := f (s), D(G) := C2 [0, 1]. (vii) Gf (s) := f (s), D(H) := {f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = f (1) = 0}. (viii) Hf (s) := f (s), D(J) := {f ∈ C2 [0, 1] : f (0) = 0}. Which of these operators are generators on X? (3) Consider X := C0 (R, C2 ) and Af (s) := f (s) + M f (s), 0 1

s ∈ R,

where M := 1 0 and D(A) := C10 (R, C2 ). Show that σ(A) decomposes into −1 + iR and 1 + iR and that there exists a corresponding spectral decomposition. (Hint: Transform M into a diagonal matrix.) (4) Let A be an operator on a Banach space X and let B be a restriction of A. If B is surjective and A is injective, then A = B. In particular, A = B if B ⊂ A and ρ(A) ∩ ρ(B) = ∅.

168


b. Spectral Theory for Generators The Hille–Yosida theorem already ensures that the spectrum of the generator of a strongly continuous semigroup always lies in a proper left half-plane and thus satisfies a property not shared by arbitrary closed operators. In this section we study the spectrum of generators and its relation to the spectrum of the semigroup operators more closely. For (unbounded) semigroup generators, the role played by the spectral radius in the case of bounded operators is taken over by the following quantity. 1.21 Definition. Let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be a closed operator. Then s(A) := sup Re λ : λ ∈ σ(A) is called the spectral bound of A. Note that s(A) can be any real number including −∞ (if σ(A) = ∅) and +∞. For the generator A of a strongly continuous semigroup T = T (t) t≥0 , however, the spectral bound s(A) is always dominated by the growth bound there exists Mw ≥ 1 such that ω0 := ω0 (T) := inf w ∈ R : T (t) ≤ Mw ewt for all t ≥ 0 of the semigroup1 (see Definition I.1.5 and Corollary II.1.13). We now show that ω0 is related to the spectrum (more precisely, to the spectral radius) of the operators T (t). 1.22 Proposition. For the spectral bound s(A) of A and for a generator the growth bound ω0 of the generated semigroup T (t) t≥0 , one has 1 1 log T (t) = lim log T (t) t→∞ t t 1 = log r T (t0 ) < ∞ t0

−∞ ≤ s(A) ≤ ω0 = inf (1.17)

t>0

for each t0 > 0. In particular, the spectral radius of the semigroup operator T (t) is given by (1.18)

r T (t) = eω0 t

for all t ≥ 0.

For the proof we need the following elementary fact. 1 Occasionally, we write “ω (A)” instead of “ω (T),” because by Theorem II.1.4 the 0 0 semigroup T is uniquely determined by its generator A.


169

1.23 Lemma. Let ξ : R+ → R be bounded on compact intervals and subadditive; i.e., ξ(s + t) ≤ ξ(s) + ξ(t) for all s, t ≥ 0. Then inf

t>0

ξ(t) ξ(t) = lim t→∞ t t

exists. Proof. Fix t0 > 0 and write t = kt0 + s with k ∈ N, s ∈ [0, t0 ). The subadditivity implies ξ(t0 ) ξ(s) ξ(t) 1 ≤ ξ(kt0 ) + ξ(s) ≤ + . t kt0 t0 kt0 Because k → ∞ if t → ∞, we obtain lim

t→∞

ξ(t0 ) ξ(t) ≤ t t0

for each t0 > 0 and therefore lim

t→∞

ξ(t) ξ(t) ξ(t) ≤ inf ≤ lim , t>0 t t t→∞ t

which proves the assertion. Proof of Proposition 1.22. Because the function t → ξ(t) := log T (t) satisfies the assumptions of Lemma 1.23, we can define v := inf

t>0

1 1 log T (t) = lim log T (t) . t→∞ t t

From this identity, it follows that evt ≤ T (t) for all t ≥ 0; hence v ≤ ω0 by the definition of ω0 . Now choose w > v. Then there exists t0 > 0 such that 1 log T (t) ≤ w t for all t ≥ t0 ; hence T (t) ≤ ewt for t ≥ t0 . On [0, t0 ], the norm of T (t) remains bounded, so we find M ≥ 1 such that T (t) ≤ M ewt for all t ≥ 0; i.e., ω0 ≤ w. In as much as we have already proved that v ≤ ω0 , this implies ω0 = v.

170


To prove the identity ω0 = 1/t0 log r T (t0 ) , we use the Hadamard formula for the spectral radius in Corollary 1.4; i.e., 1 1 r T (t) = lim T (nt) /n = lim et· /nt log T (nt) n→∞ n→∞ t· lim ( 1/nt log T (nt))

=e

= et ω0 .

n→∞

The remaining inequalities have already been proved in Corollary II.1.13. We now state a simple consequence of this proposition. 1.24 Corollary. For the generator A of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with growth bound ω0 = −∞ (e.g., for a nilpotent semigroup) one has r T (t) = 0 for all t > 0 and σ(A) = ∅. The inequalities in (1.17) establish an interesting relation between spectral properties of the generator A, expressed by the spectral bound s(A), and the qualitative behavior of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 , expressed by the growth bound ω0 . In particular, if spectral and growth bound coincide, we obtain infinite-dimensional versions of the Liapunov Stability Theorem 3.6 below. For general strongly continuous semigroups, however, the situation is more complex, as shown by the following examples and counterexamples. 1.25 Examples. We first discuss (left) translation semigroups on various function spaces (see Section I.3.c and Paragraph II.2.9) and show that the spectra heavily depend on the choice of the Banach space. Before starting the discussion, it is useful to observe that the exponential functions ελ (s) := eλs ,

s ∈ R,

satisfy d ds ελ

= λελ

for each λ ∈ C.

Because the generator A of a translation semigroup is the first derivative with appropriate domain (see Paragraph II.2.9), it follows that λ is an D(A). eigenvalue of A if and only if ελ belongs to the domain (i) Consider the (left) translation semigroup T (t) t≥0 on the space X := C0 (R+ ). Its generator is with domain

Af = f D(A) = f ∈ C0 (R+ ) ∩ C1 (R+ ) : f ∈ C0 (R+ ) .

Therefore, we have ελ ∈ D(A) if and only if λ ∈ C satisfies Re λ < 0. This shows that P σ(A) = {λ ∈ C : Re λ < 0}.


171

We have that s(A) ≤ ω0 ≤ 0, because T (t) t≥0 is a contraction semigroup. This implies, because the spectrum is closed, that σ(A) = {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ 0}. The same eigenfunctions ελ yield eigenvalues eλt for the operators T (t). Again by the contractivity of T (t) we obtain that P σ T (t) = {z ∈ C : |z| < 1} and σ T (t) = {z ∈ C : |z| ≤ 1} for t > 0. (ii) Next, we consider the (left) translation group T (t) t∈R on X := C0 (R). Then P σ(A) = ∅, because no ελ belongs to D(A). However, for each α ∈ R, the functions fn (s) := eiαs · e

−s2/ n

, n ∈ N,

form an approximate eigenvector of A for the approximate eigenvalue iα. This shows that Aσ(A) = σ(A) = iR, and analogously

σ T (t) = {z ∈ C : |z| = 1}. (iii) The nilpotent right translation semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X := C0 (0, 1] satisfies ω0 = −∞ (see Example II.3.19), hence it follows from Corollary 1.24 that σ T (t) = {0} and σ(A) = ∅. In addition, for each λ ∈ C, the resolvent is given by s (1.19) R(λ, A)f (s) = e−λ(s−τ ) f (τ ) dτ, s ∈ (0, 1], f ∈ X. 0

(iv) For the periodic translation group on, e.g., X = C2π (R) (see Paragraph I.3.15), the functions ελ belong to D(A) if and only if λ ∈ iZ. Because A has compact resolvent (use Example II.5.9), we obtain from Corollary 1.15, σ(A) = P σ(A) = iZ. The spectra of the operators T (t) are always contained in Γ := {z ∈ C : |z| = 1} and contain the eigenvalues eikt for k ∈ Z. Because σ T (t) is closed, it follows that / Q, Γ if t/2π ∈ σ T (t) = Γq if t/2π = p/q ∈ Q with p and q coprime, where Γq := {z ∈ C : z q = 1}.

172


In each of these examples there is a close relationship between the spectrum σ(A) and the spectra σ T (t) implying ω0 = s(A). As we show next this is not always the case. 1.26 Counterexample. Consider the Banach space X := C0 (R+ ) ∩ L1 (R+ , es ds) of all continuous functions on R+ that vanish at infinity and are integrable for es ds endowed with the norm ∞ |f (s)|es ds. f := f ∞ + f 1 = sup |f (s)| + s≥0

0

The (left) translations define a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X whose generator is Af = f , D(A) = f ∈ X : f ∈ C1 (R+ ), f ∈ X (use Proposition II.2.3). As a first observation, we note that T (t) = 1 for all t ≥ 0. Thus, we have ω0 = 0, and hence s(A) ≤ 0. On the other hand, ελ ∈ D(A) only if Re λ < −1. Hence, we obtain for the point spectrum P σ(A) = {λ ∈ C : Re λ < −1} and for the spectral bound s(A) ≥ −1. We now show that λ ∈ ρ(A) if Re λ > −1. In fact, for every f ∈ X we have that t

· 1 - lim

t→∞

e−λs T (s)f ds

0

exists, because T (s)f 1 ≤ e−s f 1 for all s ≥ 0. Moreover, the limit t · ∞ - lim e−λs T (s)f ds exists, because (1.20)

∞ 0

t→∞

0

e |f (s)| ds < ∞. Consequently, the improper integral ∞ e−λs T (s)f ds s

0

exists in X for every f ∈ X and yields the inverse of λ − A (see Theorem II.1.10.(i)). We conclude that σ(A) = {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ −1}, whence s(A) = −1, whereas ω0 = 0 and r T (t) = 1 by (1.18). In particular, for t > 0, T (t) has spectral values that are not the exponential of a spectral value of A. The above phenomenon makes the spectral theory of semigroups interesting and nontrivial. Before analyzing carefully what we call the “spectral mapping theorem” for semigroups in Section 2, we first discuss an example showing spectral theory at work.


173

1.27 Delay Differential Operators. We return to the delay differential operator from Paragraph II.3.29 defined as Af := f

on

D(A) := f ∈ C1 [−1, 0] : f (0) = Lf

on the Banach space X := C[−1, 0] for some linear form L ∈ X and try to compute its point spectrum P σ(A). As for the above translation semigroups, we see that a function f ∈ C[−1, 0] is an eigenfunction of A only if it is (up to a scalar factor) of the form f = ελ , where ελ (s) := eλs ,

s ∈ [−1, 0],

for some λ ∈ C. However, such a function ελ belongs to D(A) if and only if it satisfies the boundary condition which becomes

ελ (0) = Lελ , λ = Lελ .

Therefore, if we define ξ(λ) := λ − Lελ , we obtain the point spectrum P σ(A) as P σ(A) = λ ∈ C : ξ(λ) = 0 . Because ξ(·) is an analytic function on C, its zeros are isolated, and therefore P σ(A) is a discrete subset of C. identify the entire spectrum σ(A), we observe that X1 := In order to D(A), · A is a closed subspace of C1 [−1, 0] and that the canonical injection i : C1 [−1, 0] → C[−1, 0] is compact by the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem. Therefore, it follows from Proposition II.5.8 that R(λ, A) is a compact operator, and by Corollary 1.15, we obtain σ(A) = P σ(A). Proposition. The spectrum of the above delay differential operator consists of isolated eigenvalues only. More precisely, we call λ → ξ(λ) := λ − Lελ the corresponding characteristic function and obtain σ(A) = λ ∈ C : ξ(λ) = 0 . In other words, the spectrum of A consists of the zeros of the characteristic equation ξ(λ) = 0.

174


For arbitrary L ∈ C[−1, 0] , it is still difficult to determine all complex zeros of the analytic function ξ(·). However, for many applications as in Section 3, it suffices to know the spectral bound s(A). To determine it, we now assume that the linear form L is decomposed as L = L0 + aδ0 , where L0 is a positive linear form on C[−1, 0] having no atomic part in 0. This means that limn→∞ L0 (fn ) = 0 whenever (fn )n∈N is a bounded sequence in X satisfying limn→∞ fn (s) = 0 for all −1 ≤ s < 0. As usual, δ0 denotes the point evaluation at 0, and we take a ∈ R. In this case, we can determine s(A) by discussing the characteristic equation as an equation on R only. Corollary. Consider the above delay differential operator A, D(A) on X := C[−1, 0] and assume that L ∈ X is of the form L = L0 + aδ0 for some a ∈ R and some positive L0 ∈ X having no atomic part in 0. Then the spectral bound s(A) is given by s(A) = sup{λ ∈ R : λ = L0 ελ + a}, and one has the equivalence s(A) < 0 ⇐⇒ L0 + a < 0. Proof. The characteristic function λ → ξ(λ) := λ − L0 ελ − a, considered as a function on R, is continuous and strictly increasing from −∞ to +∞. This holds, because we assumed L0 to be positive having no atomic part in 0, hence satisfying L0 ελ ↓ 0

as

λ → ∞.

Therefore, ξ has a unique real zero λ0 satisfying λ0 < 0 ⇐⇒ 0 < ξ(0). It remains to show that λ0 = s(A). Take λ = µ + iν ∈ σ(A). Using the above characteristic equation, this can be restated as µ + iν = L0 (εµ εiν ) + a. By taking the real parts in this identity and using the positivity of L0 , we obtain µ = Re(L0 (εµ εiν ) + a) ≤ |L0 (εµ εiν )| + a ≤ L0 (εµ ) + a, which, by the above properties of the characteristic function ξ on R, implies µ ≤ λ0 . Therefore, we conclude that µ = Re λ ≤ λ0 = s(A) for all λ ∈ σ(A).


175

We recommend restating the above results for L1 f := af (0) + bf (−1) 0 L2 f := af (0) + k(s)f (s) ds

or

−1

with a ∈ R, 0 ≤ b, and 0 ≤ k ∈ L∞ [−1, 0]. 1.28 Exercises. (1) Use the rescaling procedure and Counterexample 1.26 to show that for arbitrary real numbers α < β, there exists a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A such that s(A) = α

and

ω0 = β.

(2) Let T (t) t∈R be a strongly continuous group on X with generator A. Then there exist constants m, M ≥ 1, v, w ∈ R such that 1 −vt e x ≤ T (t)x ≤ M ewt x m

for all t ≥ 0, x ∈ X.

Show that −v ≤ − s(−A) ≤ s(A) ≤ w. (3) Let T (t) t≥0 be the semigroup from Counterexample 1.26. Find an approximate eigenvector (fn )n∈N corresponding to the approximative eigenvalue λ = 1 of T (t) for t > 0. (4) Modify Counterexample 1.26 to obtain s(A) = −∞, ω0 = 0. (Hint: 2 Consider X := C0 (R+ ) ∩ L1 (R+ , ex dx).) (5∗ ) Consider the translations on X :=

f ∈ C(R) : lim f (s) = lim e3s f (s) = 0 and s→∞

s→−∞

∞

−∞

e2s |f (s)| ds < ∞

endowed with the norm f := sup |f (s)| + sup e |f (s)| + 3s

s≥0

s≤0

∞

−∞

e2s |f (s)| ds.

Show that this yields a strongly continuous group on X with growth bound ω0 = 0, but spectral bound s(A) < −1. (Hint: See [Wol81].)

176


2. Spectral Mapping Theorems It is our ultimate goal to describe the semigroup T (t) t≥0 by the spectrum σ(A) of its generator A. However, as we have already seen in Counterexample 1.26, the general case is much more complex. As a first, but essential, step, we now study in detail the relation between the spectrum σ(A) of the generator A and the spectrum σ T (t) of the semigroup operators T (t). The intuitive interpretation of T (t) as the exponential “etA ” of A leads us to the following principle. 2.1 Leitmotif. The spectra σ T (t) of the semigroup operators T (t) should be obtained from the spectrum σ(A) of the generator A by a relation of the form (2.1) “σ T (t) = etσ(A) := etλ : λ ∈ σ(A) .”

a. Examples and Counterexamples If (2.1), or a similar relation, holds, we say that the semigroup T (t) t≥0 and its generator A satisfy a spectral mapping theorem. However, before proving results in this direction, we explain in a series of examples and counterexamples what might go wrong. 2.2 Examples. (i) Take a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 that cannot be extended to a group (e.g., the left semigroup on translation C0 (R+ ); see Paragraph I.3.16). Then 0 ∈ σ T (t) for all t > 0, although evidently 0 is never contained in etσ(A) . Therefore, we are led to modify (2.1) and call a spectral mapping theorem the relation (SMT) σ T (t) \ {0} = etσ(A) for t ≥ 0. (ii) For the translation group in Example 1.25.(iv) we have σ(A) = periodic iZ and σ T (t) = Γ if t/2π is irrational, hence (SMT) does not hold. The phenomenon appearing in this example is referred to as a weak spectral mapping theorem, meaning that only (WSMT) σ T (t) \ {0} = etσ(A) \ {0} for t ≥ 0 holds. The above modifications of the spectral mapping theorem are simply caused by properties of the complex exponential map z → ez and have no serious consequences for our applications in Section 3. Much more problematic is the failure of (SMT) or (WSMT) due to the particular form of the operator A and the semigroup T (t) t≥0 .

Section 2. Spectral Mapping Theorems

177

Such a breakdown always occurs for generators A for which the so-called spectral bound equal growth bound condition (SBeGB)

s(A) = ω0

does not hold. In fact, if s(A) < ω0 , then

etσ(A) ⊆ λ ∈ C : |λ| ≤ et s(A) , and r T (t) = et ω0 > et s(A) (use Proposition 1.22). For later reference, it is useful to state this fact explicitly. 2.3 Proposition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A one always has the implications (SMT) =⇒ (WSMT) =⇒ (SBeGB). Therefore, the generator and the semigroup in Counterexample 1.26 do not satisfy (WSMT). Whereas the semigroup in this example was the wellknown translation semigroup, the chosen Banach space seems to be artificial. Therefore, we present more examples for a drastic failure of (WSMT) on more natural spaces. Even for semigroups on Hilbert spaces the spectral mapping theorem may fail. 2.4 Counterexample (on Hilbert Spaces). We start by considering the n-dimensional Hilbert space Xn := Cn (with the · 2 -norm) and the n × n matrix ⎞ ⎛ 0 1 0 0 ⎟ ⎜ .. . . . . . . 0⎟ ⎜. An := ⎜ . ⎟. . .. 1 ⎠ ⎝ .. 0 ··· ··· 0 Because tA An is nilpotent, we obtain σ(An ) = {0}. Moreover, the semigroups e n t≥0 generated by An satisfy tA e n ≤ et for t ≥ 0. We now collect some elementary facts about these matrices. −1

Lemma. For the elements xn := n /2 (1, . . . , 1) ∈ Xn we have xn = 1 and −1 (i) An xn − xn ≤ n /2 , tA −1 (ii) e n xn − et xn ≤ tet n /2 for t ≥ 0 and n ∈ N.

178


Proof. Assertion (i) follows directly from the definition, whereas (ii) is obtained from t etAn xn − et xn = et−s esAn (An xn − xn ) ds 0

(see (1.10) in Lemma II.1.9) and the estimate etAn ≤ et .

Consider now the Hilbert space

/2 Xn := (xn )n∈N : xn ∈ Xn and xn 2 < ∞ , X := n∈N

n∈N

with inner product

(xn ) | (yn ) := (xn | yn ) n∈N

on which we define A := ⊕n∈N (An + in) with maximal domain in X. D(A) This operator generates the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 given by / T (t) := eint etAn n∈N

and satisfying

T (t) ≤ sup eint etAn ≤ et n∈N

for t ≥ 0. This implies that its growth bound satisfies ω0 ≤ 1. We now show that s(A) = 0. For λ ∈ C with Re λ > 0, we have R(λ, An + in) = R(λ − in, An ) =

n−1 k=0

Akn . (λ − in)k+1

Because An = 1, we conclude that R(λ, An + in) ≤

n−1 k=0

1 1 ≤ |λ − in|k+1 |λ − in| − 1

for n ∈ N sufficiently large. This implies supn∈N R(λ, An + in) < ∞, and therefore / R(λ, An + in) n∈N

is a bounded operator on X, which evidently gives the inverse of (λ − A). Hence, s(A) ≤ 0, whereas s(A) ≥ 0 follows from the fact that each in is an eigenvalue of A.


179

To prove ω0 ≥ 1, we show that r T (t0 ) ≥ et0 for t0 = 2π. Take xn as in the lemma, identify it with the element (0, . . . , xn , 0, . . .) ∈ X, and consider the sequence (xn )n∈N in X. Then (xn )n∈N is an approximate eigenvector of T (2π) with eigenvalue e2π . So we have proved the following. Proposition. For the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with / T (t) := (eint etAn ) n∈N

and its generator A :=

/

(An + in)

n∈N

on the Hilbert space X := ⊕2n∈N Xn , one has s(A) = 0 < ω0 = 1. For still more examples we refer to Exercises 2.13.

b. Spectral Mapping Theorems for Semigroups After having seen so many failures of our Leitmotif 2.1, it is now time to present some positive results. Surprisingly, “most” of (SMT) still holds. 2.5 Spectral Inclusion Theorem. For the generator A, D(A) of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X, we have the inclusions (2.2) σ T (t) ⊃ etσ(A) for t ≥ 0. More precisely, for the point, approximate point, and residual spectra the inclusions P σ T (t) ⊃ etP σ(A) , (2.3) Aσ T (t) ⊃ etAσ(A) , (2.4) Rσ T (t) ⊃ etRσ(A) (2.5) hold for all t ≥ 0. Proof. Recalling the identities

(2.6)

t eλt x − T (t)x = (λ − A) eλ(t−s) T (s)x ds for x ∈ X, 0 t λ(t−s) e T (s)(λ − A)x ds for x ∈ D(A) = 0

from Lemma II.1.9, we see that eλt − T (t) is not bijective if (λ − A) fails to be bijective. This proves (2.2).

180


We now prove (2.4) and, by the same arguments, (2.3). Take λ ∈ Aσ(A) and a corresponding approximate eigenvector (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A). Define a new sequence (yn )n∈N by t eλ(t−s) T (s)(λ − A)xn ds. yn := eλt xn − T (t)xn = 0

These vectors satisfy for some constant c > 0 the estimate t λ(t−s) T (s)(λ − A)xn ds ≤ c (λ − A)xn → 0 as n → ∞. yn ≤ e 0

Hence, eλt is an approximate eigenvalue of T (t), and (xn )n∈N serves as the same approximate eigenvector for all t ≥ 0. Next, take λ ∈ Rσ(A) and use (2.6) to obtain that rg eλt − T (t) ⊂ rg(λ − A) is not dense in X. Hence (2.5) holds.

It follows from the above examples and counterexamples that not all converse inclusions can hold in general. In fact, we show that it is only the approximate point spectrum that is responsible for the failure of (SMT). For the point spectrum and the residual spectrum, however, we are able to prove a spectral mapping formula. 2.6 Spectral Mapping Theorem for Point and Residual Spectrum. For the generator A, D(A) of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X, we have the identities (2.7) P σ T (t) \ {0} = etP σ(A) , Rσ T (t) \ {0} = etRσ(A) (2.8) for all t ≥ 0.

Proof. Take t0 > 0 and 0 = λ ∈ P σ T (t0 ) .According to Paragraphs I.1.10 and II.2.2, T (t) t≥0 to the rescaled semi we can pass from the semigroup group S(t) t≥0 := e−t log λ T (t0 t) t≥0 having the generator B = t0 A − log λ. Because for this rescaled semigroup 1 is an eigenvalue of S(1), we can assume that t0 = 1 and λ = 1 from the beginning. Take 0 = x ∈ X satisfying T (1)x = x. Then the function t → T (t)x = 0 is periodic, hence there exists at least one k ∈ Z such that the Fourier coefficient 1

e2πik(1−s) T (s)x ds

yk := 0

is nonzero. However, by Lemma II.1.9, yk ∈ D(A) and (A − 2πik)yk = T (1)x − e2πik x = 0. Therefore, 2πik ∈ P σ(A) satisfying e2πik = 1 ∈ P σ T (1) . This and (2.3) prove (2.7).


181

The identity for the residual spectrum follows from (2.7) if we consider thesun dual semigroup T (t) and use that Rσ(A) = P σ(A ) and t≥0 Rσ T (t) = P σ T (t) ; cf. [EN00, IV.2.18]. Because we have proved spectral mapping theorems for the point as well as for the residual spectrum, it follows that in Counterexample 2.4 there must be approximate eigenvalues µ of T (t) that do not stem from some λ ∈ σ(A) via the exponential map. In order to overcome this failure and to obtain a spectral mapping theorem for the entire spectrum, we could exclude the existence of such approximate eigenvalues and assume σ T (t) = P σ T (t) ∪ Rσ T (t) (e.g., if T (t) t≥0 is eventually compact). A more interesting and useful way to save the validity of (SMT), however, is to look for additional properties of the semigroup that guarantee even (2.9) Aσ T (t) \ {0} = etAσ(A) . Eventual norm continuity seems to be the most general hypothesis doing this job. However, we first characterize those approximate eigenvalues that satisfy the spectral mapping property. 2.7 Lemma. For an approximate eigenvalue λ = 0 of the operator T (t0 ) the following statements are equivalent. (a) There exists a sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ X satisfying xn = 1 and T (t0 )xn − λxn → 0 such that limt↓0 supn∈N T (t)xn − xn = 0. (b) There exists µ ∈ Aσ(A) such that λ = eµt0 . Proof. The implication (b) ⇒ (a) follows from identity (2.6). To show the converse implication it suffices, as in the proof of Theorem 2.6, to consider the case λ = 1 and t0 = 1 only. To this end we take an eigenvector (xn )n∈N as in (a). The uniform continuity of approximate T (t) t≥0 on the vectors xn implies that the maps [0, 1] t → T (t)xn , n ∈ N, are equicontinuous. Choose now xn ∈ X , xn ≤ 1, satisfying xn , xn ≥ 1/2 for all n ∈ N. Then the functions [0, 1] s → ξn (s) := T (s)xn , xn are uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Hence, there exists, by the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem, a convergent subsequence, still denoted by (ξn )n∈N , such that limn→∞ ξn =: ξ ∈ C[0, 1]. From ξ(0) = limn→∞ ξn (0) ≥ 1/2 we obtain that ξ = 0. Therefore, this function has a nonzero Fourier coefficient; i.e., there exists µm := 2πim, m ∈ Z, such that 1 e−µm s ξ(s) ds = 0. 0

182


If we set

zn :=

1

e−µm s T (s)xn ds,

0

we have zn ∈ D(A) by Lemma II.1.3. In addition, the elements zn satisfy (µm − A)zn = 1 − e−µm T (1) xn = 1 − T (1) xn → 0 and

lim zn ≥ lim | zn , xn | n→∞ 1 −µm s ≥ lim e T (s)xn , xn ds n→∞ 0 1 −µm s ≥ e ξ(s) ds > 0.

n→∞

0

This shows that zn/zn n∈N is an approximate eigenvector of A corresponding to the approximate eigenvalue µm = 2πim. For eventually norm-continuous semigroups we can always construct approximate eigenvectors satisfying condition (a) of the previous lemma. Therefore, we obtain (SMT). 2.8 Spectral Mapping Theorem for Eventually Norm-Continuous Semigroups. Let T (t) t≥0 be an eventually norm-continuous semigroup with generator A, D(A) on the Banach space X. Then the spectral mapping theorem (SMT) σ T (t) \ {0} = etσ(A) , t ≥ 0, holds. Proof. Taking into account all our previous theorems such as 2.5 and 2.6 and using the rescaling technique, we have to show the following. If 1 ∈ Aσ T (1) , then there exists m ∈ Z such that µm := 2πim ∈ Aσ(A). To prove this claim, we take an approximate eigenvector (xn )n∈N of T (1); i.e., we assume xn = 1 and T (1)xn − xn → 0. Moreover, we assume that t → T (t) is norm-continuous for t ≥ t0 . Now choose t0 < k ∈ N and observe that T (k)xn − xn = T (k)xn − T (k − 1)xn + T (k − 1)xn − · · · − xn → 0 as n → ∞. The semigroup T (t) continuous on t≥0 is then uniformly T (k)xn n∈N by assumption and on T (k)xn − xn n∈N, because this is a null sequence (use Proposition T (t) A.3). Therefore, t≥0 is uniformly continuous on (xn )n∈N = T (k)xn n∈N − T (k)xn − xn n∈N , and the assertion follows from Lemma 2.7.


183

Combining the previous result with Proposition 2.3 yields the following. 2.9 Corollary. For an eventually norm-continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A, D(A) on a Banach space X, we have (SBeGB)

s(A) = ω0 .

Finally, we know from Section II.5 that many important regularity properties of semigroups imply eventual norm continuity. We state the spectral mapping theorem for these semigroups. 2.10 Corollary. The spectral mapping theorem (SMT) etσ(A) = σ T (t) \ {0}, t ≥ 0, and the spectral bound equal growth bound condition (SBeGB)

s(A) = ω0

hold for the following classes of strongly continuous semigroups: (i) Eventually compact semigroups, (ii) Eventually differentiable semigroups, (iii) Analytic semigroups, and (iv) Uniformly continuous semigroups. It is the above condition (SBeGB) that is used in Section 3 (e.g., in Theorem 3.7) to characterize stability of semigroups. However, not all of (SMT) is needed to derive (SBeGB). The weaker property (WSMT), already encountered in Example 2.2.(ii), is sufficient. Therefore, the following simple result on multiplication operators (see Section I.3.a and Paragraph II.2.8) is a useful addition to the above corollaries. 2.11 Proposition. Let Mq be the generator of a multiplication semigroup Tq (t) t≥0 on X := C0 (Ω) (or X := Lp (Ω, µ)) defined by an appropriate function q : Ω → C. Then (WSMT) σ Tq (t) = etσ(Mq ) for t ≥ 0, hence (SBeGB) hold. Proof. In Proposition I.3.2.(iv), we stated that the spectrum of a multiplication operator is the closed (essential) range of the corresponding function. Therefore, we obtain σ Tq (t) = etq(ess) (Ω) = etq(ess) (Ω) = etσ(Mq ) for all t ≥ 0.

A simple, but typical, example is given by the multiplication operator Mq (xn )n∈Z := (inxn )n∈Z

for (xn )n∈Z ∈ (Z). Then σ(Mq ) = iZ and σ Tq (t) = Γ whenever t/2π ∈ / Q. Therefore, only (WSMT) but not (SMT) holds. See also Example 2.2.(ii). p

184


Most important, the above proposition can be applied to semigroups of normal operators on Hilbert spaces. In fact, due to the Spectral Theorem I.3.9, these semigroups are always isomorphic to multiplication semigroups on L2 -spaces; hence (WSMT) holds. 2.12 Corollary. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup of nor mal operators on a Hilbert space and denote its generator by A, D(A) . Then (WSMT) σ T (t) = etσ(A) for t ≥ 0, hence (SBeGB) hold. 2.13 Exercises. (1) Show that the semigroup in Counterexample 2.4 is in fact a group whose generator has compact resolvent. (2) (Counterexample on reflexive Banach spaces). Take 1 < p < q < ∞ and the (reflexive) Banach space X := Lp [1, ∞) ∩ Lq [1, ∞) with norm f := f p + f q . Then the following hold. (i) The operator family T (t) t≥0 given by T (t)f (s) := f (set ) for s ≥ 1, t ≥ 0, and f ∈ X, defines a strongly continuous semigroup on X. (ii) The generator A of T (t) t≥0 is given by Af (s) = sf (s), s ≥ 1, with domain f is absolutely continuous D(A) = f ∈ X : . and s → sf (s) belongs to X (iii) Spectral and growth bound of A are given by s(A) = − p1 < − 1q = ω0 . (Hint: See Exercise I.1.8.(3) and [EN00, IV.3.3].) (3) On the space L22π of all 2π-periodic functions on R2 that are square integrable on [0, 2π]2 consider the second-order partial differential equation ⎧ 2 ∂ u(t, x, y) ∂u(t, x, y) ∂ 2 u(t, x, y) ∂ 2 u(t, x, y) ⎪ ⎪ , = + + eiy ⎨ ∂t2 ∂x2 ∂y 2 ∂x (2.10) ⎪ ⎪ ⎩ u(0, x, y) = u0 (x, y), ∂u(0, x, y) = u1 (x, y) ∂t for (x, y) ∈ [0, 2π]2 and t ≥ 0. (i) Show that (2.10) is equivalent to the abstract Cauchy problem (ACP) for the operator A, D(A) defined by i· d d2 d2 A(u, v) := v, dx D(A) := H22π × H12π 2 u + dy 2 u + e dx u , on X := H12π × L22π and for the initial value (u0 , u1 ). (ii) Show that A generates a strongly continuous semigroup on X. (iii∗ ) Show that s(A) = 0, whereas ω0 ≥ 1/2. (Hint: See [HW03], [BLX05], [Ren94].)

Section 3. Stability and Hyperbolicity of Semigroups

185

(4) Assume that for some t0 > 0 the spectral radius r T (t0 ) is an eigenvalue of T (t0 ) (or of its adjoint T (t0 ) ). Show that in this case one has (SBeGB); i.e., s(A) = ω0 . (5) Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup on some L1 (Ω, µ) and assume that 0 ≤ T (t)f for all 0 ≤ f ∈ L1 (Ω, µ) and all t ≥ 0. Show that (SBeGB) holds; that is, s(A) = ω0 . (Hint: Use Lemma VI.2.1.) (6∗ ) A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with growth bound ω0 is called asymptotically norm-continuous if lim lim e− ω0 t T (t + h) − T (t) = 0. t→∞

h↓0

(i) Show that a semigroup T (t) t≥0 is asymptotically norm-continuous if it can be written as T(t) = U0 (t) + U1 (t) for operator families U0 (t) t≥0 and U1 (t) t≥0 where U0 (t) t≥0 is eventually normcontinuous and limt→∞ e− ω0 t U1 (t) = 0. (ii) Construct an example of such a decomposition using Theorem III.1.10. (iii) For a semigroup T (t) t≥0 that is norm-continuous at infinity, the spectral mapping theorem holds for the boundary spectrum; i.e., σ T (t) ∩ λ ∈ C : |λ| = r T (t) = et(σ(A)∩(s(A)+iR)) for t ≥ 0 and r T (t) > 0. See [MM96], [Bla01], and [NP00].

3. Stability and Hyperbolicity of Semigroups We now come to one of the most interesting aspects of semigroup theory. After having established generation, perturbation, and approximation theorems in the previous chapters, we investigate the qualitative behavior of a given semigroup. We already dealt with this problem when we classified strongly continuous semigroups according to their regularity properties in Section II.5, but we now concentrate on their “asymptotic” behavior. By this we mean the behavior of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 for large t > 0 or, more precisely, the existence (or nonexistence) of lim T (t),

t→∞

where the limit is understood in various ways and for different topologies. If we recall that the function t → T (t)x yields the (mild) solutions of the corresponding abstract Cauchy problem x(t) ˙ = Ax(t), t ≥ 0, (ACP) x(0) = x (see Section II.6), it is evident that such results will be of utmost importance.

186


Among the many interesting types of asymptotic behavior, we first study stability of strongly continuous semigroups T (t) t≥0 . By this we mean that the operators T (t) should converge to zero as t → ∞. However, as is to be expected in infinite-dimensional spaces, we have to distinguish different concepts of convergence.

a. Stability Concepts For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A : D(A) ⊆ X → X we now make precise what we mean by “ lim T (t) = 0” t→∞

and vary the topology and the “speed” of the convergence by proposing the following concepts. 3.1 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is called (a) Uniformly exponentially stable if there exists ε > 0 such that lim eεt T (t) = 0;

(3.1)

t→∞

(b) Uniformly stable if lim T (t) = 0;

(3.2)

t→∞

(c) Strongly stable if lim T (t)x = 0

(3.3)

t→∞

for all x ∈ X;

(d) Weakly stable if (3.4)

lim T (t)x, x = 0

t→∞

for all x ∈ X and x ∈ X .

We start our discussion of these concepts by noting that the two “uniform” properties coincide and are even equivalent to a “pointwise” condition. 3.2 Proposition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. (b) T (t) t≥0 is uniformly stable. (c) There exists ε > 0 such that limt→∞ eεt T (t)x = 0 for all x ∈ X.


187

Proof. Clearly, (a) implies (b) and (c). Because eω0 t = r T (t) ≤ T (t) for all t ≥ 0 (see 1.22), (b) implies ω0 < 0, hence (a). If Proposition (c) holds, then eεt T (t) t≥0 is strongly, hence uniformly, bounded, which ε implies limt→∞ e /2t T (t) = 0. It is obvious from the definition that uniform (exponential) stability implies strong stability, which again implies weak stability. The following examples show that none of the converse implications holds. 3.3 Examples. (i) The (left) translation semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X := Lp (R+ ), 1 ≤ p < ∞, is strongly stable, but one has T (t) = 1 for all t ≥ 0; hence it is not uniformly stable. (ii) The (left) translation group T (t) t∈R on X := Lp (R), 1 < p < ∞, is a group of isometries, hence is not strongly stable. However, for functions f ∈ X, g ∈ X = Lq (R), 1/p + 1/q = 1, with compact support and large t, one has that T (t)f and g have disjoint supports, whence ∞ T (t)f, g = f (s + t)g(s) ds = 0. −∞

For arbitrary f ∈ X, g ∈ X and for each n ∈ N, we choose fn ∈ X and gn ∈ X with compact support such that f − fn p ≤ 1/n and g − gn q ≤ 1/n. Then ! ! ! ! T (t)f, g ≤ T (t)(f − fn ), gn + T (t)f, g − gn + T (t)fn , gn ! ≤ n1 g q + 1 + f p + T (t)fn , gn . Because the last term is 0 for large t, we conclude that lim T (t)f, g = 0 for all f ∈ X, g ∈ X ; i.e., T (t) t≥0 is weakly stable. t→∞

It is now our goal to characterize the above stability concepts, it is hoped by properties of the generator. In the following subsection we try this for uniform exponential stability. 3.4 Exercises. (1) Discuss the above stability properties for multiplication semigroups on Lp (R) and C0 (R). (Hint: See [EN00, Expl. V.2.19.(ii) and (iii)].) (2) Let µ be a probability measure on R that is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure. Use the Riemann–Lebesgue (see lemma Theorem A.20) to show that the multiplication semigroup T (t) t≥0 with T (t)f (s) := eits f (s), s ∈ R, is weakly stable on Lp (R, µ) for 1 ≤ p < ∞.

188


(3) Show that the adjoint semigroup of a strongly stable semigroup is weak∗ -stable; that is, limt→∞ T (t)x, x = 0 for all x ∈ X, x ∈ X , but not strongly stable in general. (4) Show that a strongly continuous semigroup with compact resolvent which is weakly stable is necessarily uniformly exponentially stable. In particular, an immediately compact semigroup that is weakly stable is already uniformly exponentially stable.

b. Characterization of Uniform Exponential Stability We start by recalling the definition of the growth bound ω0 : = ω0 (T) := ω0 (A) : = inf w ∈ R : ∃ Mw ≥ 1 such that T (t) ≤ Mw ewt ∀ t ≥ 0 (3.5) = inf w ∈ R : lim e−wt T (t) = 0

t→∞

of a semigroup T = T (t) t≥0 with generator A (compare Definition I.1.5). From this definition it is immediately clear that T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable if and only if (3.6)

ω0 < 0.

Moreover, the identity (3.7)

ω0 = inf

t>0

1 1 1 log T (t) = lim log T (t) = log r T (t0 ) t→∞ t t t0

for each t0 > 0, proved in Proposition 1.22, yields the following characterizations of uniform exponential stability. 3.5 Proposition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , the following assertions are equivalent. (a) ω0 < 0; i.e., T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. (b) limt→∞ T (t) = 0. (c) T (t0 ) < 1 for some t0 > 0. (d) r T (t1 ) < 1 for some t1 > 0. All these stability criteria, as nice as they are, have the major disadvan tage that they rely on the explicit knowledge of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 and its orbits t → T (t)x. In most cases, however, only the generator (and its resolvent) is given. Therefore, direct characterizations of uniform exponential stability of the semigroup in terms of its generator are more desirable. Spectral theory provides the appropriate tool for this purpose, and the following classical Liapunov theorem for matrix semigroups serves as a prototype for the results for which we are looking.


189

3.6 Theorem. (Liapunov 1892). Let etA t≥0 be the one-parameter semigroup generated by A ∈ Mn (C). Then the following assertions are equivalent. (a) The semigroup is stable; i.e., limt→∞ etA = 0. (b) All eigenvalues of A have negative real part; i.e., Re λ < 0 for all λ ∈ σ(A). In particular, one hopes that the inequality (3.8)

s(A) < 0

for the spectral bound s(A) = sup{Re λ : λ ∈ σ(A)} of the generator A (see Definition II.1.12) characterizes uniform exponential stability. Counterexample 1.26 (see also Exercises 2.13.(2) and (3)) shows that this fails drastically. The reason is the failure of the spectral mapping theorem (SMT) as discussed in Section 2. On the other hand, if some (weak) spectral mapping theorem holds for the semigroup T (t) t≥0 and its generator A, then by Proposition 2.3 the growth bound ω0 and the spectral bound s(A) coincide, and hence the inequality (3.8) implies (3.6). The coincidence of growth and spectral bounds clearly implies that uniform exponential stability is equivalent to the negativity of the spectral bound. So in this case the inequality s(A) < 0 characterizes uniform exponential stability of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 in terms of its generator A and its spectrum σ(A). This is one reason for our thorough study of spectral mapping theorems in Section 2. The results obtained there, in particular Theorem 2.8 and its corollaries, pay off and yield the spectral bound equal growth bound condition (SBeGB) already stated in Corollary 2.9. We restate this as an infinite-dimensional version of Liapunov’s stability theorem. 3.7 Theorem. An eventually norm-continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable if and only if the spectral bound s(A) of its generator A satisfies s(A) < 0. Looking back at the stability results obtained so far, i.e., Proposition 3.5 and Theorem 3.7, we observe that in each case we needed information on the semigroup itself in order to conclude its stability. This can be avoided by restricting our attention to semigroups on Hilbert spaces only. ¨ss 1984, Greiner 1985). A strong3.8 Theorem. (Gearhart Pru 1978, ly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Hilbert space H is uniformly exponentially stable if and only if the half-plane {λ ∈ C : Re λ > 0} is contained in the resolvent set ρ(A) of the generator A with the resolvent satisfying (3.9)

M := sup R(λ, A) < ∞. Re λ>0

190


This stability criterion is extremely useful for the stability analysis of concrete equations; see [BP05, Sects. 5.1 and 10.4], [CL03], [LZ99]. For a proof we refer to [EN00, Thm. V.1.11]. Its theoretical significance is emphasized by the following comments. 3.9 Comments. (i) The theorem does not hold without the boundedness assumption on the resolvent in the right half-plane. Take the semigroup −t T (t) t≥0 from Counterexample 2.4. Then e /2 T (t) t≥0 is a semigroup on a Hilbert space having spectral bound s(A) = − 1/2, and hence we have {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≥ 0} ⊂ ρ(A), but its growth bound is ω0 = 1/2. (ii) The theorem does not hold on arbitrary Banach spaces. In fact, for the semigroup in Counterexample 1.26 one has R(λ + is, A) ≤ R(λ, A) for all λ > s(A) = −1 and s ∈ R (use the integral representation (1.20) of the resolvent in Section 1.b). Because T (t) = 1 for all t ≥ 0, this semigroup is not uniformly exponentially stable, but the resolvent of its generator exists and is uniformly bounded in {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≥ 0}. 3.10 Exercises. (1) Show that for a strongly continuous semigroup T = T (t) t≥0 on a Hilbert space X with generator A its growth bound is given by

ω0 = inf λ > s(A) : sup R(λ + is, A) < ∞ . s∈R

(2 ) Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on a Hilbert space H. ∗ (i) Define U(t)T := T (t) · T · T (t) for t ≥ 0 and T ∈ L(H) and show that U(t) t≥0 is a semigroup on L(H) that is continuous for the weak operator topology on L(H). ∞ (ii) Define R(λ)T := 0 e−λt U(t)T dt, T ∈ L(H) and λ large, in the weak operator topology and show that R(λ) is the resolvent of a Hille–Yosida operator G, D(G) on L(H). (iii) Formally, G is of the form G(T ) = AT − T A for T ∈ D(G). Can you give a precise meaning to this statement? (Hint: See [Alb01].) (iv) Show that the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. (b) U(t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. (c) s(G) < 0. ∞ (d) 0 U(t)T dt exists for every T ∈ L(H). (e) There exists a positive definite R ∈ L(H) such that GR = −I. (Hint: See [Nag86, D-IV, Sect. 2].) ∗


191

c. Hyperbolic Decompositions We now use the previous stability theorems in order to decompose a semigroup into a stable and an unstable part. More precisely, we try to decompose the Banach space into the direct sum of two closed subspaces such that the semigroup becomes “forward” exponentially stable on one subspace and “backward” exponentially stable on the other subspace. 3.11 Definition. A semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X iscalled hyperbolic if X can be written as a direct sum X = Xs ⊕Xu of two T (t) t≥0 invariant, closed subspaces Xs , Xu such that the restricted semigroups (Ts (t))t≥0 on Xs and (Tu (t))t≥0 on Xu satisfy the following conditions. (i) The semigroup (Ts (t))t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable on Xs . (ii) The operators Tu (t) are invertible on Xu , and Tu (t)−1 t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable on Xu . It is easy to see that a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is hyperbolic if and only if there exists a projection P and constants M, ε > 0 such that each T (t) commutes with P , satisfies T (t) ker P = ker P , and (3.10) (3.11)

T (t)x ≤ M e−εt x 1 +εt T (t)x ≥ e x M

for t ≥ 0 and x ∈ rg P, for t ≥ 0 and x ∈ ker P.

As in the case of uniform exponential stability, we look for a spectral characterization of hyperbolicity. Using the spectra σ T (t) of the semigroup operators T (t), this is easy. 3.12 Proposition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 , the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is hyperbolic. (b) σ T (t) ∩ Γ = ∅ for one/all t > 0. Proof. The proof of the implication (a) ⇒ (b) starts from the observation that σ T (t) = σ Ts (t) ∪ σ Tu (t) because of the direct sum decomposition. By assumption, Ts (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable; hence r Ts (t) < 1 for t > 0, and therefore σ Ts (t) ∩ Γ = ∅. By the same argument, we obtain that r Tu (t)−1 < 1. Because σ Tu (t) = λ−1 : λ ∈ σ Tu (t)−1 , we conclude that |λ| > 1 for each λ ∈ σ Tu (t) ; hence σ Tu (t) ∩ Γ = ∅.

192


To prove (b) ⇒ (a), we fix s > 0 such that σ T (s) ∩ Γ = ∅ and use the existence projection P corresponding to the spectral set of a spectral λ ∈ σ T (s) : |λ| < 1 . Then the space X is the direct sum X = Xs ⊕ Xu of the T (t) t≥0 -invariant subspaces Xs := rg P and Xu := ker P . The restriction Ts (s) ∈ L(Xs ) of T (s) in Xs has spectrum σ Ts (s) = λ ∈ σ T (s) : |λ| < 1 , hence spectral radius r Ts(s) < 1. From Proposition 3.5.(d), it follows that the semigroup Ts (t) t≥0 := P T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable on Xs . Similarly, the restriction Tu (s) ∈ L(Xu ) of T (s) in Xu has spectrum σ Tu (s) = λ ∈ σ T (s) : |λ| > 1 , hence is invertible on Xu . Clearly, this implies that Tu (t) is invertible for 0 ≤ t ≤ s, whereas for t > s we choose n ∈ N such that ns > t. Then Tu (s)n = Tu (ns) = T (ns − t)Tu (t) = Tu (t)Tu (ns − t); hence Tu (t) is invertible, Tu (s) is bijective. Moreover, for the spec because 3.5.(d) this tral radius we have r Tu−1 (s) < 1, and again by Proposition implies uniform exponential stability for the semigroup Tu (t)−1 t≥0 . The reader might be surprised by the extra condition in Definition 3.11.(ii) requiring the operators Tu (t) to be invertible on Xu . However, this is necessary in order to obtain the spectral characterization in Proposition 3.12. 3.13 Example. Take the rescaled (left) shift semigroup T (t) t≥0 on L1 (R− ) defined by εt e f (s + t) for s + t ≤ 0, T (t)f (s) := 0 otherwise, for f ∈ L1 (R− ), s ≤ 0, and some fixed ε > 0. Then T (t)f = eεt f for all f ∈ L1 (R− ); i.e., estimate (3.11) holds for all f ∈ L1 (R− ). However, the operators T (t) are not invertible and have spectrum σ T (t) = λ ∈ C : |λ| ≤ eεt for all t > 0. This phenomenon is due to the fact that an injective operator on an infinite-dimensional Banach space need not be surjective. We can exclude this by assuming dim Xu < ∞. See also Exercise 3.16.(2).


193

Up to now, our definition and characterization of hyperbolic semigroups use explicit knowledge of the semigroup itself. As in Section 3.b, we want to find a characterization in terms of the generator A and its spectrum σ(A). As we should expect from Proposition 2.3, we need some extra relation between σ(A) and σ T (t) . Clearly, the spectral mapping theorem (SMT) or even the weak spectral mapping theorem (WSMT) from Section 2 is sufficient for this purpose. However, we show that an even weaker property does this job. 3.14 Definition. We say that the strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A satisfies the circular spectral mapping theorem if (CSMT)

Γ · σ T (t) \ {0} = Γ · etσ(A)

for one/all t > 0.

That “for one” implies “for all” in (CSMT) follows from Proposition 3.12 (and rescaling). Indeed, (CSMT) allows us to characterize hyperbolicity by a condition on the spectrum of the generator. 3.15 Theorem. If (CSMT) holds for a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A, then the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is hyperbolic. (b) σ T (t) ∩ Γ = ∅ for one/all t > 0. (c) σ(A) ∩ iR = ∅. Proof. The equivalence of (a) and (b) has been shown in Proposition 3.12. Property (b) always implies (c) (use Theorem 2.5), whereas (c) implies (b) if (CSMT) holds. We finally remark that (SMT) ⇒ (WSMT) ⇒ (CSMT) and refer to [GS91] and [KS05] where (CSMT) has been shown for interesting classes of generators and semigroups. 3.16 Exercises. (1) Show, by rescaling the semigroup and the estimates in (3.10) and (3.11), that a decomposition analogous to Definition 3.11 holds whenever σ T (t) ∩ αΓ = ∅ for some α > 0. (2) Let T (t) t≥0 satisfy (3.10) and (3.11) for a projection P commuting Tu (t0 ) with T (t) for all t ≥ 0. Assume that for some t0 > 0 the restriction to ker P is compact. Show that dim ker P < ∞ and that T (t) t≥0 is hyperbolic.

194


(3) Show that the generator A of a hyperbolic strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 is invertible and its inverse is given by ∞ ∞ −1 −1 A x= Tu (t) (I − P )x dt − Ts (t)P x dt. 0

0

Derive an analogous representation of R(λ, A) for Re λ < ε, where ε is the constant in (3.10) and (3.11). (4∗ ) Given a hyperbolic semigroup T (t) t≥0 and a corresponding decomposition X = Xs ⊕ Xu , prove that Xs = x ∈ X : lim T (t)x = 0 . t→∞

Conclude from this that Xs and Xu are uniquely determined.

4. Convergence to Equilibrium In contrast to the previous section, we now suppose that 0 is an eigenvalue of the generator A of a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on the Banach space X. This means that fixed space fix T (t) t≥0 := x ∈ X : T (t)x = x for all t ≥ 0 , which coincides with ker A by Exercise 4.12.(1), is nontrivial. It is our goal to understand under which assumptions (and in which sense) each orbit t → T (t)x converges to such a fixed point (or, equilibrium point). We first state some consequences if the semigroup converges for the weak operator topology. 4.1 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on X and assume that there exists an operator P ∈ L(X) such that ! lim T (t)x, x = P x, x for all x ∈ X, x ∈ X . t→∞ Then P = P 2 is a projection onto the fixed space fix T (t) t≥0 with ker P = rg A and commutes with every T (t), t ≥ 0. Proof. Because for convergence with respect to the weak operator topology we have T (s) · lim T (t) = lim T (t) · T (s) = lim T (t + s) = P t→∞ t→∞ t→∞ for all s ≥ 0, it follows that rg P = fix T (t) t≥0 . By the same argument we conclude that P 2 = lim T (t) P = lim T (t)P = P t→∞

t→∞

is a projection which evidently commutes with each T (t).

Section 4. Convergence to Equilibrium

195

It only remains to show that ker P = rg A. To that purpose we observe first that rg A = lin x − T (t)x : x ∈ X, t ≥ 0 by the definition of the generator A and formula (1.6) in Lemma II.1.3. This immediately shows that each x − T (t)x belongs to ker P . For the converse inclusion we show that each x ∈ X vanishing on lin{x−T (t)x : x ∈ X, t ≥ 0} also vanishes on ker P . Indeed, for such x we obtain T (t) x = x , hence ! ! x, x = x, T (t) x = T (t)x, x → P x, x as t → ∞. For x ∈ ker P this yields x, x = 0 as claimed.

We observe that weak convergence implies, by the uniform boundedness principle, that the semigroup is uniformly bounded. Moreover, the space X splits into the direct sum X = fix T (t) t≥0 ⊕ Xs with Xs := rg A such that the restricted semigroup on Xs is weakly stable (see Definition 3.1.(d)). Up to now there are few sufficient conditions, and no satisfactory characterizations, for weakly converging (or weakly stable) semigroups. We refer to [EFNS05] for recent results in this direction. The case of strong convergence is much better understood and useful spectral criteria have been found by Arendt–Batty [AB88] and Lyubich–V˜ u [LV88] (see also [EN00, Thm. V.2.21] and [CT06]). A systematic study of the asymptotic behavior of semigroups can be found in [Nee96]. We restrict our considerations to the case of uniform convergence and again start with a necessary condition. 4.2 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on X and assume that P := · - lim T (t) = 0 t→∞

exists. Then 0 is a dominant eigenvalue, i.e., Re λ ≤ ε < 0 for all 0 = λ ∈ σ(A). In addition, this eigenvalue is a simple pole of the resolvent R(·, A). Proof. By 4.1, P = P 2 is a projection onto fix T (t) t≥0 commut Lemma ing with T (t) t≥0 we can decompose the space X into the direct . Hence sum of the two T (t) t≥0 -invariant subspaces X = rg P ⊕ rg(I − P ) = fix T (t) t≥0 ⊕ rg(I − P ) = ker A ⊕ rg(I − P ). 2 Now T (t)|rg P = Irg P and from lim t→∞ T (t)(I −P ) = P − P = 0 and Proposition 3.2 we conclude that T s (t) t≥0 := T (t)|rg(I−P ) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. Hence, T (t) t≥0 can be decomposed as

T (t) = Irg P ⊕ Ts (t),

t ≥ 0.

196


The proposition in Paragraph II.2.3 yields the corresponding decomposition A = 0rg P ⊕ As for the generator A, where As := A|rg(I−P ) . Because the growth bound of Ts (t) t≥0 , and hence also the spectral bound of As is negative, all claims follow easily. If the spectral mapping theorem from Section 2 holds on every (SMT) closed subspace Y ⊆ X (e.g., if T (t) t≥0 is eventually norm-continuous), then these spectral conditions are even sufficient for uniform convergence. 4.3 Proposition. Let T (t) t≥0 be a strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on X such that (SMT) holds for every subspace semigroup T (t)|Y t≥0 and any T (t) t≥0 -invariant, closed subspace Y ⊆ X. Then the following are equivalent. (a) P := limt→∞ T (t) exists in the operator norm with P = 0. (b) 0 is a dominant eigenvalue of A and a first-order pole of R(·, A). Proof. By the previous lemma it suffices to show that (b) implies (a). Let P0 be the residue of the resolvent R(·, A) in λ = 0. Then by Paraof A with respect to graph 1.18 the operator P0 is the spectral projection the decomposition σ(A) = {0} ∪ σ(A) \ {0} =: σc ∪ σu of σ(A); cf. Proposition 1.17. Let Xc := rg P0 = ker(I − P0 ) and Xu := ker P0 = rg(I − P0 ). Then Xc and Xu are T (t) t≥0 -invariant and X = Xc ⊕ Xu . Because by assumption λ = 0 is a first-order pole of R(·, A), by (1.13) in Paragraph 1.18 we conclude AP = 0 and hence Ac := A|Xc = 0Xc . This implies that Tc (t) := T (t)|Xc = IXc . Next we define Tu (t) := T (t)| Xu which by Paragraph II.2.3 defines a strongly continuous semigroup Tu (t) t≥0 on Xu with generator Au := A|Xu . Because 0 is dominant in σ(A) = {0} ∪ σ(A u ) and σ(Au ) = σu , we obtain s(Au ) < 0. Hence (SMT) applied to Tu (t) t≥0 and Proposition 2.3 imply ω0 (Au ) = s(Au ) < 0 and therefore limt→∞ Tu (t) = 0. Summarizing these facts we conclude that lim T (t) = lim Tc (t) ⊕ lim Tu (t) = IXc ⊕ 0Xu = P0 = P.

t→∞

t→∞

t→∞

From Theorem 2.8 we know that eventually norm-continuous semigroups are covered by this result. However, many semigroups arising naturally do not satisfy (SMT), hence Proposition 4.3 does not apply. In addition, it is clear from the proof above that we do not need a spectral mapping theorem for the entire spectrum. In order to handle these aspects we introduce a new class of semigroups. 4.4 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X is called quasi-compact if there exists t0 > 0 such that the essential spectral radius ress T (t0 ) < 1.


197

The operators in a quasi-compact semigroup T (t) t≥0 need not be compact, but only have to approach the subspace K(X) of all compact operators on X. More precisely, the following holds. 4.5 Proposition. For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach space X the following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is quasi-compact. (b) ress T (t) < 1 for all t > 0. (c) lim dist T (t), K(X) := lim inf T (t) − K : K ∈ K(X) = 0. t→∞

t→∞

(d) T (t0 ) − K < 1 for some t0 > 0 and K ∈ K(X). Proof. To show that (a) implies (b) we observe that for the essential spectral radius ress (·) from Paragraph 1.19 we have ress T (t) = eωess t , where

1 log T (t) ess t denotes the essential growth bound of T (t) t≥0 . This can be proved exactly as the corresponding formula for the spectral radius r(·) given in (1.18) from 1.22. By assumption (a) there exists t0 > Proposition 0 such that ress T (t0 ) = et0 ωess < 1 which implies ωess < 0. Hence ress T (t) = et ωess < 1 for all t > 0 as claimed. To prove that (b) implies (c) we note that ωess := inf

t>0

1/ 1/ ress T (1) = lim T (1)n essn = lim T (n) essn < 1 n→∞

for S ess

n→∞

:= dist S, K(X) . Thus, we find n0 ∈ N and a < 1 such that T (n) ess < an

for all n ≥ n0 .

Now choose compact operators Kn ∈ K(X) such that T (n) − Kn < an for n ≥ n0 and define M := sup0≤s≤1 T (s) . We then obtain T (t) − T (t − n)Kn ≤ T (t − n) · T (n) − Kn ≤ M an for t ∈ [n, n + 1] and n ≥ n0 . Because T (t − n)Kn is compact for all n ≥ n0 this implies limt→∞ dist T (t), K(X) = 0 as claimed. Clearly, (c) implies (d), and (d) ⇒ (a) follows from ress T (t0 ) ≤ T (t0 ) ess = T (t0 ) − K ess ≤ T (t0 ) − K < 1. This completes the proof.

198


The simplest examples of quasi-compact semigroups are eventually compact semigroups on one side and uniformly exponentially stable semigroups on the other side. In the next theorem we show that any quasi-compact semigroup can be decomposed into the direct sum of a semigroup on a finite-dimensional space and a uniformly exponentially stable semigroup. 4.6 Theorem. Let T (t) t≥0 be a quasi-compact strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on a Banach space X. Then the following holds. (i) The set {λ ∈ σ(A) : Re λ ≥ 0} is finite (or empty) and consists of poles of R(·, A) of finite algebraic multiplicity. If we denote these poles by λ1 , . . . , λm with corresponding orders k1 , . . . , km and spectral projections P1 , . . . , Pm , we have (ii) T (t) = T1 (t) + T2 (t) + · · · + Tm (t) + R(t), where (4.1) and (4.2)

Ti (t) = eλi t

k i −1 j j=0

R(t) ≤ M e−εt

t (A − λi )j Pi , j!

t ≥ 0 and 1 ≤ i ≤ m,

for some ε > 0, M ≥ 1 and all t ≥ 0.

Proof. Let T := T (t0 ) where t0 > 0 such that ress (T (t0 )) < 1. Because every µ ∈ σ(T ) satisfying |µ| > ress (T ) is isolated, the set σ(T ) ∩ {z ∈ C : |z| ≥ 1} is finite. Hence we can write σc := σ(T ) ∩ {z ∈ C : |z| ≥ 1} = {µ1 , . . . , µl }. Now let σu := σ(T ) \ σc . Then σ(T ) is the disjoint union of the closed sets σc and σu and hence we can define the associated spectral projection Pc as in (1.7). This projection yields the spectral decomposition X = rg(Pc ) ⊕ ker(Pc ) =: Xc ⊕ Xu . Observing that σc is finite and any of its elements is a pole of R(·, T ) of finite algebraic multiplicity we conclude that Xc is finite-dimensional. Moreover, because for all λ ∈ ρ(T ) the resolvent R(λ, T ) = R λ, T (t0 ) commutes with every T (t), t ≥ 0, the spaces Xc and Xu = rg(I − Pc ) are T (t) t≥0-invariant. Hence we can consider the subspace semigroups Tc := Tc (t) t≥0 and Tu := Tu (t) t≥0 on Xc and Xu , respectively, defined by Tc (t) := T (t)|Xc and Tu (t) := T (t)|Xu . By Paragraph II.2.3 the corresponding generators are given by the parts Ac := A|Xc ∈ L(Xc ) and Au := A|Xu . Because Xc is finite-dimensional, σ(Ac ) is finite. Moreover, for Tc the Spectral Mapping Theorem 2.8 holds and hence for all t ≥ 0 we can write σ(Ac ) = {λ1 , . . . , λm } and σ Tc (t) = eλt : λ ∈ σ(Ac ) . In particular, for t = t0 we obtain σc = σ Tc (t0 ) = eλt0 : λ ∈ σ(Ac ) ⊂ {z ∈ C : |z| ≥ 1} and hence Re λ ≥ 0 for all λ ∈ σ(Ac ).


199

Next we show that Tu is uniformly exponentially stable. By contradiction assume 1.22 implies that that ω0 (Tu ) ≥ 0. Then (1.18) in Proposition r Tu (t0 ) ≥ 1; i.e., there exists µ ) ∈ σ Tu (t0 ) satisfying |) µ| ≥ 1. Because by (1.8), σu = σ Tu (t0 ) we obtain µ ) ∈ σu . However, by construction, σu ⊂ {z ∈ C : |z| < 1}. Hence |) µ| < 1 which is a contradiction. Therefore ω0 (Tu ) < 0 which also implies that s(Au ) < 0. Hence we conclude from the disjoint decomposition σ(A) = σ(Ac )∪σ(Au ) that {λ ∈ σ(A) : Re λ ≥ 0} = σc is finite. Moreover, because Xc is finite-dimensional and A = Ac ⊕ Au , every element of σc is a pole of finite algebraic multiplicity of R(·, A) = R(·, Ac ) ⊕ R(·, Au ). This proves (i). m In order to verify (ii) we define the spectral projection P := i=1 Pi of A corresponding to the spectral set {λ1 , . . . , λm }; cf. Proposition 1.17. Then P = Pc by Proposition 1.17.(vi). Next we decompose T (t) = T (t)P1 + · · · + T (t)Pm + T (t)(I − P ) where, by Paragraph II.2.3, the restricted semigroup generator A| rg Pi . Because rg Pi is finite-dimensional and T (t)| rg Pi t≥0has (A − λi )| rg Pi ki = 0 we obtain as in the proof of Proposition I.2.6, Ti (t) = T (t)Pi = eλi t

k i −1 j j=0

t (A − λi )j Pi j!

for all t ≥ 0.

This proves (4.1). In order to verify (4.2) it suffices to note that R(t) = T (t)(I − P ) = Tu (t)(I − Pc ) and ω0 (Tu ) < 0. Because the spectral mapping theorem (SMT) holds for the above finitedimensional semigroups Ti (t) t≥0 , 1 ≤ i ≤ m, we obtain the following stability criterion. 4.7 Corollary. A quasi-compact strongly continuous semigroup with generator A is uniformly exponentially stable if and only if s(A) < 0. From (4.1) and (4.2) it is now clear which additional hypotheses imply norm convergence of T (t) to an equilibrium as t → ∞. First, we assume the existence of a dominant eigenvalue λ0 ; i.e., (4.3)

Re λ0 > sup Re λ : λ0 = λ ∈ σ(A) .

Moreover, λ0 has to be a pole of order1; hence T0 (t) simply becomes eλ0 t P0 . Considering the rescaled semigroup e−λ0 t T (t) t≥0 we obtain by estimate (4.2), −λ t e 0 T (t) − P0 ≤ e− Re λ0 t T (t) − T0 (t) = e− Re λ0 t R(t) ≤ M e−εt for some ε > 0 and M ≥ 1.

200


4.8 Corollary. Let T (t) t≥0 be a quasi-compact strongly continuous semigroup. If λ0 is a dominant eigenvalue of the generator and a first-order pole of the resolvent with residue P0 , then there exist constants ε > 0 and M ≥ 1 such that −λ t e 0 T (t) − P0 ≤ M e−εt for all t ≥ 0. It should be evident that the most interesting case occurs if λ0 = 0 in the above corollary, and we refer to [Nag86, B-IV, Thm. 2.5 and Expl. 2.6] for an important class of examples. Generators of quasi-compact semigroups can now be perturbed by an arbitrary compact operator destroying the uniform exponential stability but not the quasi-compactness. 4.9 Proposition. Let T (t) t≥0 be a quasi-compact strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on the Banach space X and take a compact operator K ∈ L(X). Then A + K generates a quasi-compact semigroup. Proof. By (IE) in Corollary III.1.7 we know that the semigroup S(t) t≥0 generated by A + K can be represented as t T (t − s)KS(s) ds S(t) = T (t) + 0

where the integral is understood in the strong sense. t In view of Proposition 4.5 it is now enough to show that the operator 0 T (t − s)KS(s) ds is compact. Because the mapping (t, x) → T (t)x is jointly continuous on R+ × X and because K is compact, the set M := {T (s)Kx : 0 ≤ s ≤ t, x ≤ 1} is t relatively compact in X. Having in mind that 0 T (t−s)KS(s)x ds, x ∈ X, is the norm limit of Riemann sums, we observe that 1 t T (t − s)KS(s)x ds ct 0 is an element of the closed convex hull co M , provided that c := sup{ S(s) : 0 ≤ s ≤ t} and x ≤ 1. Because co M is compact by Proposition A.1, the assertion follows. We have noted above that every exponentially stable semigroup is quasicompact. Therefore we obtain from Proposition 4.9 the following important class of quasi-compact semigroups. 4.10 Example. If T (t) t≥0 generates an exponentially stable semigroup with generator A and K ∈ L(X) is compact, then A + K generates a quasi-compact semigroup. We now discuss quasi-compactness and its consequences in a concrete example.


201

4.11 Example. On the Banach space X := C(R− ∪ {−∞}) we consider the first-order differential operator Af := f + mf

(4.4) with domain (4.5)

D(A) := f ∈ X : f is differentiable, f ∈ X and f (0) = Lf ,

where m ∈ X is real-valued and L is a continuous linear form on X. As in Paragraph II.3.29 we can show that the operator A, D(A) generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 . Lemma 1. The semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfies ⎧ 0 1 m(σ) dσ (s+t)m(0) ⎪ s e e f (0) ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎨ s+t 2 T (t)f (s) = + eτ m(0) L T (s + t − τ )f dτ ⎪ ⎪ 0 ⎪ ⎪ s+t ⎪ ⎩ m(σ) dσ e s f (s + t)

for s + t > 0, for s + t ≤ 0.

Proof. For f ∈ D(A) and 0 ≤ r ≤ t we have

r d rm(0) τ m(0) e T (t − r)f (0) + e L T (t − τ )f dτ = 0. dr 0 This implies

T (t)f (0) = etm(0) f (0) +

t

eτ m(0) L T (t − τ )f dτ. 0

On the other hand, we have

s+r d m(σ) dσ s e T (t − r)f (s + r) = 0. dr Therefore, we obtain

⎧ 0 ⎨ s m(σ) dσ e T (s + t)f (0) for s + t > 0, s+t T (t)f (s) = ⎩ s m(σ) dσ f (s + t) for s + t ≤ 0. e

This lemma allows us to give a condition that forces the semigroup T (t) t≥0 to be quasi-compact.

202


Lemma 2. If m(−∞) < 0, then the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is quasi-compact. Proof. We define operators K(t) ∈ L(X) by ⎧ 0 1 m(σ) dσ (s+t) m(0) ⎪ ⎪ s e e f (0) ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ s+t 2 ⎪ ⎨ + e(s+t−τ ) m(0) L T (τ )f dτ K(t)f (s) := 0 ⎪ 0 ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ m(σ) dσ ⎪ s f (0) (t + s + 1) · e ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎩ 0

for 0 < s + t, for − 1 < s + t ≤ 0, for s + t ≤ −1.

These operators are compact by the Arzelà–Ascoli theorem. On the other hand, because m(−∞) < 0, we have lim T (t) − K(t) = 0.

t→∞

Therefore, the semigroup T (t) t≥0 is quasi-compact.

Assume in the following that m(−∞) < 0. In order to apply Theorem 4.6 and Corollary 4.8, we have to find the eigenvalues λ of A with Re λ ≥ 0. An eigenfunction f ∈ D(A) with eigenvalue λ satisfies f = λf − mf, hence is of the form f = cgλ , where 0 m(σ) dσ λs e gλ (s) := e s for all s ∈ R− . Because Re λ ≥ 0, the functions gλ and gλ vanish at −∞, hence belong to X. Consequently, gλ ∈ D(A) if and only if λ − Lgλ − m(0) = 0. This shows that λ is an eigenvalue of A if and only if the characteristic equation (4.6)

ξ(λ) := λ − Lgλ − m(0) = 0

holds. Now, suppose that λ with Re λ ≥ 0 is not an eigenvalue of A. For each g ∈ X we want to find a function f ∈ D(A) such that f = λf − mf − g.


203

This equation is solved by f = cgλ + hλ , where

τ

0

hλ (s) :=

e

s

m(σ) dσ λ(s−τ )

e

g(τ ) dτ

s

for all s ∈ R− . If the constant c is chosen as (4.7)

c :=

g(0) + Lhλ , λ − Lgλ − m(0)

we then obtain the unique f ∈ D(A) satisfying (λ − A)f = g. This even yields an explicit representation of the resolvent of A in λ. In the remaining part of this section we look for conditions implying the existence of a dominant eigenvalue and convergence to an equilibrium. In Chapter VI we show that positivity of the semigroup is the key to such results. Here it suffices to assume that L is of the form (4.8)

L = L0 + aδ0 ,

where a is a real number and L0 is a positive linear form on X. We then have the following lemma proving the existence of a dominant eigenvalue. Lemma 3. Suppose that m(−∞) < 0. If ξ(0) ≤ 0, i.e., Lg0 ≥ −m(0), then the characteristic function ξ has a unique zero λ0 ≥ 0 that is a dominant eigenvalue of the operator A. Proof. The function ξ : R+ λ → λ−L0 gλ −a−m(0) is strictly increasing from ξ(0) to ∞. Consequently, if ξ(0) ≤ 0, it has a unique zero λ0 that is an eigenvalue of A. Now take an arbitrary eigenvalue λ of A with Re λ ≥ λ0 . Then, we have |λ − a − m(0)| = |L0 gλ | ≤ L0 gλ0 = λ0 − a − m(0). This implies λ = λ0 , and therefore λ0 is a dominant eigenvalue of A.

The eigenspace corresponding to the dominant eigenvalue λ0 is spanned by the function gλ0 , hence is one-dimensional. Moreover, it is a first-order pole, as can be seen from (4.7). After these preparations, we can give a precise description of the asymptotic behavior of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 . In particular, it follows that the rescaled semigroup e−λ0 t T (t) t≥0 converges in norm to a one-dimensional projection.

204


Proposition 4. Assume that m(−∞) < 0, L = L0 + aδ0 as in (4.8), and L0 g0 + a ≥ −m(0). Then there is a dominant eigenvalue λ0 ≥ 0 of A, a continuous linear form ϕ on X, and constants ε, M > 0 such that −λ t e 0 T (t)f − (gλ ⊗ ϕ)f ≤ M e−εt f 0

for all f ∈ X, t ≥ 0,

where (gλ0 ⊗ ϕ)f := ϕ(f ) · gλ0 . T = 4.12 Exercises. (1) Show that for a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A on a Banach space X the fixed space fix T (t) t≥0 and the kernel ker A coincide. (Hint: Use Lemma II.1.3.(iv).) (2) Let T (t) t≥0 be an eventually compact semigroup such that the spectrum σ(A) of its generator A is infinite. Show that there exists a sequence (µn )n∈N in C such that σ(A) = P σ(A) = {µn : n ∈ N} and limn→∞ Re µn = −∞. (Hint: Use Theorem 4.6 and Theorem II.5.3.)

Chapter VI Positive Semigroups

In many concrete problems solvable by semigroups, there is a natural notion of “positivity,” and only “positive” solutions make sense. In terms of the corresponding semigroup T (t) t≥0 this means that the operators T (t) should be “positive” on some ordered Banach space. The complete theory of such “one-parameter semigroups of positive operators” on Banach lattices and other ordered vector spaces can be found in [Nag86]. In the following we present the basic ideas and some typical results from this theory.

1. Basic Properties For our purposes it suffices to restrict our attention to Banach spaces of type X := Lp (Ω, µ) or C0 (Ω). On these spaces we call a function f ∈ X positive (in symbols: 0 ≤ f ) if 0 ≤ f (s)

for (almost) all s ∈ Ω.

For real-valued functions f, g ∈ X we then write f ≤ g if 0 ≤ g − f and obtain an ordering making (the real part of) X into a vector lattice; cf. [Sch74, Sect. II.1]. To indicate that 0 ≤ f and 0 = f we use the notation 0 < f .Moreover, for an arbitrary (complex-valued) function f ∈ X we define its absolute value |f | as |f |(s) := |f (s)| 205

for s ∈ Ω.

206

Chapter VI. Positive Semigroups

Recalling the definition of the norm on X, we see that (1.1)

|f | ≤ |g| implies f ≤ g

for all f, g ∈ X.

These properties make the space X a Banach lattice, and we refer to [Sch74], [MN91], or [AB85] for the abstract definitions. It is convenient to use this general terminology and to state the results for general Banach lattices. However, the reader not accustomed to this terminology may always think of the space X as one of the concrete function spaces Lp (Ω, µ) or C0 (Ω) with the canonical ordering. This is why in this chapter we use the symbol f to denote an element in a Banach lattice X. 1.1 Definition. A strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on a Banach lattice X is called positive if each operator T (t) is positive, i.e., if 0≤f ∈X

implies 0 ≤ T (t)f

for each t ≥ 0,

or equivalently, if |T (t)f | ≤ T (t)|f | holds for each f ∈ X, t ≥ 0. As in the preceding chapters, it is important to characterize positivity of the semigroup through a property of its generator. At least in the finitedimensional case this is simple. 1.2 Proposition. A matrix A = (aij )n×n ∈ Mn (C) generates a positive semigroup T (t) t≥0 if and only if it is real and positive off-diagonal; i.e., aii ∈ R and aij ≥ 0 for all 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n, i = j. Proof. By Proposition I.2.7 we know that T (t) = etA and A = lim t↓0

which means (1.2)

3 aij = lim t↓0

etA − I , t

etA ej − ej , ei t

4

for i, j = 1, . . . , n and ei the i th unit vector in Cn . If we denote the (i, j) th entry of etA by τij (t), then (1.2) implies τ (t) for i = j, limt↓0 ijt (1.3) aij = τij (t)−1 for i = j. limt↓0 t tA For e t≥0 positive, i.e., τij (t) ≥ 0 for all t, i, and j, this implies and

aij ≥ 0

for i = j

aij ∈ R

for i = j.

Section 2. Spectral Theory for Positive Semigroups

207

To prove the converse implication we suppose that A is real and positive off-diagonal. Thus we can find ρ ∈ R such that (1.4)

Bρ := A + ρI ≥ 0

(e.g., take ρ := max1≤i≤n |aii |). Hence we obtain etA = e[t(A+ρI)−tρI] = e−tρ · etBρ ≥ 0 for all t ≥ 0.

Various characterizations of generators of positive semigroups on infinitedimensional Banach spaces can be found in [Nag86, C-II]. We give only an elementary characterization in terms of the resolvent. Theorem. A strongly continuous semigroup T := 1.3 Characterization T (t) t≥0 on a Banach lattice X is positive if and only if the resolvent R(λ, A) of its generator A is positive for all sufficiently large λ. Proof. The positivity of T implies the positivity of R(λ, A) by the integral representation (1.13)& in Section II.1. Conversely, the positivity of T (t) = % limn→∞ n/tR( n/t, A) n (see Corollary IV.2.5) follows from that of R(λ, A) for λ large. In the next two sections we show the special features of a positive semigroup with respect to its spectrum and its asymptotic behavior.

2. Spectral Theory for Positive Semigroups In the years 1907–1912, O. Perron and G. Frobenius discovered very beautiful symmetry properties of the spectrum of positive matrices. Many of these properties still hold for the spectra of positive operators on arbitrary Banach lattices (cf. [Sch74, Sects. V.4 and 5]), and even carry over to generators of positive semigroups (cf. [Nag86]). In order to prove the basic results of this theory, we need the following lemma. It shows that for positive semigroups the integral representation of the resolvent holds even for Re λ > s(A) and not only for Re λ > ω0 (A) as shown in Theorem II.1.10. 2.1 Lemma. For a positive strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A on a Banach lattice X we have ∞ (2.1) R(λ, A)f = e−λs T (s)f ds, f ∈ X, 0

for all Re λ > s(A). Moreover, the following properties are equivalent for λ0 ∈ ρ(A). (a) 0 ≤ R(λ0 , A). (b) s(A) < λ0 .

208


Proof. Using the rescaling techniques from Paragraph I.1.10 it suffices to prove the representation (2.1) for Re λ > 0 whenever s(A) < 0. Because the integral representation (2.1) certainly holds for Re λ > ω0 (A), we obtain from the positivity of T (t) t≥0 the positivity of R(λ, A) for λ > ω0 (A). The power series expansion (1.3) in Proposition V.1.3 of the resolvent yields 0 ≤ R(λ, A) for all λ > s(A). The assumption s(A) < 0 and Lemma II.1.3.(iv) then imply t 0 ≤ V (t) := T (s) ds = R(0, A) − R(0, A)T (t) ≤ R(0, A), 0

hence V (t) ≤ M for all t ≥ 0 and some constant M . From this estimate we deduce that ∞ e−λs V (s) ds, Re λ > 0, 0

exists in operator norm. An integration by parts yields t t −λs −λt e T (s) ds = e V (t) + λ e−λs V (s) ds, 0

0

∞

which converges to λ 0 e−λs V (s) ds as t → ∞. This first proves (2.1) by Theorem II.1.10.(i) and then the implication (b) ⇒ (a). Moreover, as shown in Theorem 2.2 below, the integral representation (2.1) implies that s(A) ∈ σ(A). Therefore, by Corollary V.1.14, we obtain for the spectral radius of the resolvent (2.2)

r R(λ, A) =

1 λ − s(A)

for all λ > s(A). In order to prove (a) ⇒ (b) we now assume that R(λ0 , A) ≥ 0 and observe that this can be true only for λ0 real. As we have shown above, R(λ, A) is positive for λ > max{λ0 , s(A)}. Hence, an application of the resolvent equation yields R(λ0 , A) = R(λ, A) + (λ − λ0 )R(λ, A)R(λ0 , A) ≥ R(λ, A) ≥ 0 for λ > max{λ0 , s(A)}. It follows from (2.2) and (1.1) that 1 = r R(λ, A) ≤ R(λ, A) ≤ R(λ0 , A) λ − s(A) for all λ > max{λ0 , s(A)}. This implies that λ0 is greater than s(A).

O. Perron proved in 1907 that the spectral radius of a positive matrix is always an eigenvalue. The semigroup version of this result assures that the spectral bound of the generator of a positive semigroup is always a spectral value.

Section 2. Spectral Theory for Positive Semigroups

209

2.2 Theorem. Let T (t) t≥0 be a positive strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on a Banach lattice X. If s(A) > −∞, then s(A) ∈ σ(A). Proof. The positivity of the operators T (t) means that |T (t)f | ≤ T (t)|f |

for all f ∈ X, t ≥ 0.

We therefore obtain from the integral representation (2.1) that |R(λ, A)f | ≤

∞

e− Re λ·s T (s)|f | ds

0

for all Re λ > s(A) and f ∈ X. Using the inequality in (1.1) we deduce that (2.3)

R(λ, A) ≤ R(Re λ, A)

for all Re λ > s(A).

By Corollary V.1.14, there exist λn ∈ ρ(A) such that Re λn ↓ s(A) and R(λn , A) ↑ ∞. The estimate (2.3) then implies R(Re λn , A) ↑ ∞ and therefore s(A) ∈ σ(A) by Proposition V.1.3.(iii). For positive matrix semigroups much more can be said on the spectral value s(A). 2.3 Proposition. If the matrix A = (aij )n×n is real and positive offdiagonal, then s(A) is a dominant eigenvalue of A. Proof. Take the matrix Bρ = A + ρI from (1.4) above which is positive by assumption for ρ ∈ R sufficiently large. Therefore, Perron’s Theorem (see [Sch74, Chap. I, Prop. 2.3]) implies that the spectral radius r(Bρ ) is an eigenvalue of Bρ . Evidently, r(Bρ ) is dominant in σ(Bρ ). Because σ(Bρ ) = σ(A) + ρ

and

we obtain that s(A) is dominant in σ(A).

s(Bρ ) = s(A) + ρ,

Another useful property of positive semigroups is the monotonicity of the spectral bound under positive perturbations. 2.4 Corollary. Let A be the generator of a positive strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 and let B ∈ L(X) be a positive operator on the Banach lattice X. Then the following hold. (i) A+B generates a positive semigroup S(t) t≥0 satisfying 0 ≤ T (t) ≤ S(t) for all t ≥ 0. (ii) s(A) ≤ s(A + B) and R(λ, A) ≤ R(λ, A + B) for all λ > s(A + B).

210


Proof. Because B is bounded, we obtain the generation property of A+B from Theorem III.1.3. Moreover, the perturbed resolvent is R(λ, A + B) = R(λ, A) + R(λ, A)

∞

(BR(λ, A))n

for λ large

n=1

(see Section III.1, (1.3)). Because B and R(λ, A) are positive for λ > s(A), this implies (2.4)

0 ≤ R(λ, A) ≤ R(λ, A + B)

for λ large. The inequality in (i) then follows from the Post–Widder inversion formula in Corollary IV.2.5. Next, we use the representation (2.1) for the resolvents of A and A + B, respectively, and infer that (2.4) and hence R(λ, A) ≤ R(λ, A + B) hold for all λ > max{s(A), s(A + B)}. The inequality in (ii) for the spectral bounds then follows, because s(A) ∈ σ(A) by Theorem 2.2 and therefore limλ↓s(A) R(λ, A) = ∞. Due to these results, the spectral bound becomes the supremum of all real spectral values only, hence is much easier to compute. Moreover, Lemma 2.1 says that s(A) < 0 if and only if 0 ∈ ρ(A) with 0 ≤ R(0, A) = −A−1 . So in order to have s(A) < 0 for a positive semigroup it suffices to show that A is invertible with negative inverse. This is behind many maximum principles for partial differential operators. On the other hand, we know from the example in Section V.2.a that the spectral bound and the growth bound do not coincide in general, hence s(A) < 0 does not imply uniform exponential stability. Counterexample V.1.26 and Exercise V.2.13.(2) show that this even happens for positive semigroups on Banach lattices. However, on special Banach lattices positivity, as eventual norm continuity in Corollary V.2.9, makes the spectral bound and the growth bound coincide. 2.5 Theorem. Let T (t) t≥0 be a positive strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on a Banach lattice Lp (Ω, µ), 1 ≤ p < ∞. Then s(A) = ω0 holds. Proof. We only prove the case p = 2. By the usual technique rescaling and because s(A) ≤ ω0 (A) it suffices to show that T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable if s(A) < 0.

Section 3. Convergence to Equilibrium, Revisited

211

Because L2 (Ω, µ) is a Hilbert space, we can use Theorem V.3.8 and therefore have to show that sup R(λ, A) < ∞. Re λ>0

However this follows from the estimate R(λ, A) ≤ R(Re λ, A) , Re λ > 0, proved in (2.3) above. For the proof for p = 1 we refer to [ABHN01, Thm. 5.3.7] whereas the general case, due to Weis [Wei95], [Wei98], can be found in [ABHN01, Thm. 5.3.6].

3. Convergence to Equilibrium, Revisited In this section we return to the question of when the semigroup T (t) t≥0 converges to a nontrivial projection P = lim T (t). t→∞

For a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 with generator A satisfying (SMT) we showed in Proposition V.4.3 that this is true if and only if 0 is a dominant eigenvalue of A and a first-order pole of the resolvent R(·, A). We see now that positivity and quasi-compactness of the semigroup combined with irreducibility imply these conditions, hence convergence. Although all the following results hold in any Banach lattice, we again restrict our considerations to concrete function spaces. Hence we assume that T (t) t≥0 is a positive strongly continuous semigroup on a Banach lattice X = Lp (Ω, µ) for some σ-finite measure space (Ω, µ) and 1 ≤ p < ∞. We call a function f ∈ X strictly positive (in symbols, 0 f ), if 0 < f (s) for almost all s ∈ Ω. Similarly, a positive linear form ϕ ∈ X is called strictly positive (in symbols, 0 ϕ), if 0≤f ∈X

and

f, ϕ = 0

imply f = 0.

Observe that if we identify X with Lq (Ω, µ), then a strictly positive linear form corresponds to a strictly positive function. With this terminology we can now introduce the concept of an irreducible semigroup in the following way.

212


3.1 Definition. A positive semigroup with generator A on the Banach lattice X = Lp (Ω, µ) is irreducible, if for some λ > s(A) and all 0 < f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ) the resolvent satisfies 0

R(λ, A)f.

This notion is fundamental for the theory of positive semigroups and we refer to [Nag86, C-III] for a list of different characterizations and many nice properties. In particular, it is shown there that a strongly continuous semigroup is irreducible if and only if 0 R(λ, A)f for all λ > s(A) and all 0 < f ∈ X. For our purposes we need that for an irreducible positive semigroup every positive fixed element is strictly positive. 3.2 Lemma. Let T (t) t≥0 be an irreducible positive semigroup. Then implies 0 f 0 < f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 and 0 < ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 implies 0 ϕ. Proof. Assume that 0 < f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 = ker A is not strictly positive. 1 Then R(λ, A)f = /λf is also not strictly positive for λ > s(A), hence T (t) t≥0 is not irreducible. For the second statement we take 0 < ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 = ker A . Again we obtain R(λ, A )ϕ = 1/λ ϕ > 0 for λ > s(A). If ϕ is not strictly positive there exists 0 < f ∈ X such that f, ϕ = 0. This implies ! ! ! 0 = f, 1/λ ϕ = f, R(λ, A )ϕ = R(λ, A)f, ϕ , hence R(λ, A)f is not strictly positive and T (t) t≥0 not irreducible. We now give some typical examples of irreducible semigroups. 3.3 Examples. (i) On X = Cn , the semigroup etA t≥0 generated by a real, positive off-diagonal matrix A is irreducible if and only if there is no permutation matrix Q such that , ∗ ∗ QAQ−1 = . 0 ∗ For more details, see [Sch74, Chap. I] and [BP79]. (ii) If T (t) t≥0 is the semigroup induced by a measure-preserving flow (ϕt )t≥0 on Ω, i.e., T (t)f = f ◦ ϕt for f ∈ Lp (Ω, µ), t ≥ 0, then T (t) t≥0 is irreducible if and only if (ϕt )t≥0 is ergodic. See [Kre85]. (iii) The diffusion semigroup on Lp (Rn ) defined in Paragraph II.2.12 is irreducible. This follows because each operator T (t), hence each resolvent operator R(λ, A), λ large, is an integral operator with strictly positive kernel (see (2.8) in Paragraph II.2.12).


213

From these and many other examples one sees that irreducibility occurs naturally. In the next result we show that it has strong consequences on the spectrum of the generator. 3.4 Proposition. Let T (t) t≥0 be an irreducible, positive, strongly continuous semigroup with generator A on the Banach lattice X and assume that s(A) = 0. If 0 is a pole of the resolvent R(·, A), then the following properties hold. (i) fix T (t) t≥0 = ker A = lin{h} for some strictly positive function h ∈ X. (ii) fix T (t) t≥0 = ker A = lin{ϕ} for some strictly positive linear form ϕ ∈ X . (iii) 0 is a first-order pole with residua P = ϕ⊗h, where h ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 , ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 , and h, ϕ = 1. Proof. (i) We first show that fix T (t) t≥0 contains a strictly positive element. If s(A) = 0 is a pole of order k, it follows from the positivity of T (t) t≥0 , hence of R(λ, A) for λ > 0, and from Paragraph V.1.18 that U−k = lim λk R(λ, A) > 0 λ↓0

and

AU−k = U−(k+1) = 0. Hence there exists 0 = f ∈ X such that U−k f = 0. Again by positivity we obtain h := U−k |f | ≥ |U−k f | > 0. Because Ah = 0, the positive function h belongs to fix T (t) t≥0 . The irreducibility of T (t) t≥0 implies 0 h by Lemma 3.2. (ii) By analogous arguments and by taking adjoints we obtain that fix T (t) t≥0 contains strictly positive elements. We now continue the proof of (i) and show that fix T (t) t≥0 is onedimensional. Because f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 if and only if f¯ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 it suffices to prove that the real vector space

f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 : f = f¯

is one-dimensional. Take 0 = f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 . The positivity of the operators T (t) yields |f | = |T (t)f | ≤ T (t)|f |. Moreover, ! ! ! T (t)|f | − |f |, ϕ = |f |, T (t) ϕ − |f |, ϕ = 0

214


for every 0 < ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 . Because we have shown that such ϕ exists and is strictly positive, we conclude that T (t)|f | = |f |, i.e., |f | ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 . Then also f + := 12 (f + |f |) and f − := 12 (−f + |f |) belong to fix T (t) t≥0 . Again the strict positivity of the elements in the fixed space fix T (t) t≥0 implies f+ = 0 or i.e., for each f ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 we have

f − = 0;

f ≥0 or f ≤ 0. This means that fix T (t) t≥0 is a totally ordered Banach lattice, hence one-dimensional by [Sch74, Prop. II.3.4]. (iii) It remains to show that 0 is a first-order pole of R(·, A). Assume that the pole order is k > 1 and take some 0 g ∈ ker A. With the notation from Paragraph V.1.18 and P the residua of R(·, A) in 0 we have P Ak−1 = Ak−1 P = U−k , which is a positive operator as already seen above. This operator vanishes on g, hence on all functions f ∈ X such that |f | ≤ n · g

for some n ∈ N.

These functions form a dense subspace in X because g is strictly positive. Therefore U−k = 0, a contradiction. If we now add quasi-compactness to the above properties, we obtain not only convergence but convergence to a (up to scalars) unique equilibrium. 3.5 Theorem. Let T (t) t≥0 be a quasi-compact, irreducible, positive strongly continuous semigroup with generator A and assume that s(A) = 0. Then 0 is a dominant eigenvalue of A and a first-order pole of R(·, A). Moreover, there exist strictly positive elements 0 h ∈ X, 0 ϕ ∈ X , and constants M ≥ 1, ε > 0 such that T (t)f − f, ϕ · h ≤ M e−εt f for all t ≥ 0, f ∈ X. Proof. The quasi-compactness of T (t) t≥0 implies that σ(A)∩iR consists of finitely many poles only (see Theorem V.4.6). Assume that there exists 0 = iα ∈ σ(A) ∩ iR. Then iα is an eigenvalue and we have Af = iαf

and

T (t)f = eiαt f

for all t ≥ 0


215

and some 0 = f ∈ X. This means that f ∈ ker(I − T ) =: Y, where we set T := T 2π/|α| . The characterization of quasi-compactness in Proposition V.4.5 implies that ress (T ) < 1. Therefore (use the characterization of the essential spectral radius in (1.16) in Paragraph V.1.19) 1 is a pole of finite algebraic multiplicity such that dim Y < ∞. Clearly this subspace is T (t) t≥0 -invariant and the generator of the restricted semigroup has 0 as spectral bound and iα in its spectrum. In addition, Y is a (closed) sublattice of X as can be seen as follows. For y ∈ Y we have |y| = |T y| ≤ T |y| by the positivity of T . Applying a strictly positive linear form ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 yields ! ! ! T |y| − |y|, ϕ = |y|, T ϕ − |y|, ϕ = 0, hence T |y| = |y| and |y| ∈ Y . We showed that Y is a finite-dimensional (complex) Banach lattice, hence isomorphic to Cn . The restricted semigroup is still positive, hence has dominant spectral bound by Proposition 2.3. This contradicts our assumption that 0 = iα ∈ σ(A). The remaining assertions now follow from Theorem V.4.6 and Proposition 3.4. 3.6 Remark. If the semigroup T (t) t≥0 satisfies all the assumptions above but has spectral bound s(A) > 0, one obtains, via rescaling, that lim e− s(A)t T (t) − P = 0

t→∞

for a projection P := ϕ ⊗ h as above. Such a behavior is called balanced exponential growth and occurs frequently in models on population growth (see [Web85] and [Web87]). 3.7 Outlook. The above theorem is a typical but not the most general example for what positivity can do for the spectral theory and asymptotic behavior of semigroups. We mention two generalizations.

216


(i) If the semigroup is only quasi-compact and positive, then the spectral bound is still a dominant eigenvalue of the generator, but, in general, no longer a pole of first order. The asymptotic behavior is again described by a positive matrix semigroup; see [Nag86, C-IV, Thm. 2.1 and Rems. 2.2] for more details. (ii) If the semigroup is only positive and s(A) a pole of the resolvent, then the boundary spectrum σ(A) ∩ s(A) + iR is cyclic; i.e., if s(A) + iα ∈ σ(A) then also s(A) + ikα ∈ σ(A) for all k ∈ Z. Recall that if, in addition, the semigroup is eventually norm-continuous, then this boundary spectrum must be bounded by Theorem II.5.3. Therefore, s(A) again becomes a dominant eigenvalue of A. See [Nag86, C-III. Cors. 2.12 and 2.13].

4. Semigroups for Age-Dependent Population Equations In this section we show how the previous results on the asymptotic behavior of positive quasi-compact semigroups can be used to study a model for an age-dependent population described by the Cauchy problem

(APE)

⎧ ∂f ∂f ⎪ (a, t) + (a, t) + µ(a)f (a, t) = 0 ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ∂t ⎨ ∂a ∞ f (0, t) = β(a)f (a, t) da ⎪ ⎪ ⎪ 0 ⎪ ⎩ f (a, 0) = f0 (a)

for a, t ≥ 0, for t ≥ 0, for a ≥ 0.

Here t and a are nonnegative real variables representing time and age, respectively, f (·, t) describes the age structure of a population at time t and f0 is the initial age structure at time t = 0. Moreover, µ and β are supposed to be bounded, measurable, and positive functions describing the mortality rate and birth rate, respectively. For further details as well as for nonlinear and vector-valued generalizations of this model we refer to [Gre84] and [Web85]. In order to rewrite (APE) as an abstract Cauchy problem we take the Banach space X := L1 (R+ ) and define on it the closed and densely defined operator Am by Am f := −f − µf,

f ∈ D(Am ) := W1,1 (R+ ).

In the sequel we will always assume that (4.1)

µ∞ := lim µ(a) > 0 a→∞

exists.

Section 4. Semigroups for Age-Dependent Population Equations

217

Then for Re λ > −µ∞ it’s an exercise in calculus to show that (4.2)

rg(λ − Am ) = X

ker(λ − Am ) = lin{ελ },

and

where −

(4.3)

a

ελ (a) := e

0

(λ+µ(s)) ds

.

Next we define the restriction (4.4)

Af := Am f,

D(A) :=

f ∈ D(Am ) : f (0) =

∞

β(a)f (a) da 0

of Am which incorporates the birth process given by the second equation of (APE) into the domain D(A). Then (APE) is equivalent to the abstract Cauchy problem (ACP)

u(t) ˙ = Au(t)

for t ≥ 0,

u(0) = f0

for u(t) := f (·, t). So instead of studying (APE) we solve (ACP) by semigroup methods. To this end, by Theorem II.6.6, we have to prove that A generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X. In this case the unique solution of (APE) is given by f (a, t) := (T (t)f0 )(a). As a preparatory step we discuss the case β = 0; i.e., we consider the operator A0 f := Am f,

D(A0 ) := f ∈ D(Am ) : f (0) = 0 .

Then it is not difficult toverify that A0 generates a positive strongly continuous semigroup T0 (t) t≥0 given by (4.5)

% & T0 (t)f (a) =

0 a − µ(s) ds e a−t · f (a − t)

for 0 ≤ a < t, for t ≤ a.

Moreover, the following holds. 4.1 Proposition. The spectra of A0 and T0 (t), t > 0, are given by σ(A0 ) = λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ −µ∞ ,

σ T0 (t) = λ ∈ C : |λ| ≤ e−µ∞ t

Proof. For λ ∈ C we define a (λ+µ(s)) ds hλ (a) := e 0 .

218


! Then hλ ∈ X = L∞ (R+ ) for Re λ < −µ∞ and (λ − A0 )f, hλ = 0 for all f ∈ D(A0 ). This shows that λ−A0 is not surjective for Re λ < −µ∞ and hence {λ ∈ C : Re λ ≤ −µ∞ } ⊆ σ(A0 ). On the other hand (4.1) implies that a+t µ(a) = lim µ(s) ds t→0

a

converges uniformly in a ∈ R+ . Using this fact together with the explicit representation of T0 (t) in (4.5) we conclude from Proposition V.1.22 that ω0 (A0 ) ≤ −µ∞ . Now the assertion follows because etσ(A0 ) ⊆ σ T0 (t) by the Spectral Inclusion Theorem V.2.5 and r T (t0 ) = et ω0 (A0 ) by Proposition V.1.22. We now consider the case β = 0, i.e., the operator A given by (4.4). The functions ελ defined by (4.3) are positive and satisfy ελ ≤ 1/λ for all λ > 0. Thus for λ > β ∞ the operator Φλ :=

1 · ελ ⊗ β ∈ L(X) 1 − ελ , β

is well-defined and positive. 4.2 Lemma. For λ > β ∞ the operator I + Φλ is invertible with inverse (4.6)

−1

(I + Φλ )

= I − ελ ⊗ β.

Moreover, (I + Φλ )D(A0 ) = D(A) and (4.7)

(λ − A)(I + Φλ ) = λ − A0 .

Proof. Formula (4.6) Moreover, from ελ ∈ can be verified by inspection. D(Am ) and D(A) = f ∈ D(Am ) : f (0) = f, β it follows easily that (I + Φλ )D(A0 ) ⊆ D(A)

and

(I + Φλ )−1 D(A) ⊆ D(A0 );

i.e., (I + Φλ )D(A0 ) = D(A). Finally, for f ∈ D(A0 ) we have (λ − A)(I + Φλ )f = (λ − Am )f + (λ − Am )Φλ f = (λ − A0 )f because rg Φλ = lin{ελ } = ker(λ − Am ).

The following proposition opens the door for the application of the results from the previous section. Here and in the sequel we always assume that (4.8)

β ∈ D(A0 ) = W1,∞ (R+ ).

4.3 Proposition. The operator A is the generator of a positive strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X. Moreover, T (t) − T0 (t) is compact and positive for every t ≥ 0.


219

Proof. By (4.7) the operators A − λ and (I + Φλ )−1 (A0 − λ) = A0 − λ + λελ ⊗ β − (ελ ⊗ β)A0 are similar for λ > β ∞ . From the assumption (4.8) it follows that (ελ ⊗ β)A0 has the bounded extension ελ ⊗ A0 β to X. Thus by the Bounded Perturbation Theorem III.1.3 and by similarity (see Paragraph I.1.9) we conclude that A generates a strongly continuous semigroup T (t) t≥0 on X. Next we observe that (4.7) implies R(λ, A) = (I + Φλ )R(λ, A0 ) ≥ R(λ, A0 ) ≥ 0

for λ > β ∞ .

From the Post–Widder inversion formula in Corollary IV.2.5 we then obtain T (t) ≥ T0 (t) ≥ 0;

i.e., T (t) − T0 (t) ≥ 0

for all t ≥ 0.

It only remains to show that T (t) − T0 (t) is compact. To this end we recall that by the above considerations A − λ = (I + Φλ ) · (A0 − λ + λελ ⊗ β − ελ ⊗ A0 β) · (I + Φλ )−1 for λ > β ∞ . If S(t) t≥0 denotes the semigroup generated by the operator A0 + λελ ⊗ β − ελ ⊗ A0 β, this implies T (t) = (I + Φλ ) · S(t) · (I + Φλ )−1 . by (the proof of) Because the operator λελ ⊗ β − ελ ⊗ A0 β is compact, Proposition V.4.9 the perturbed semigroup S(t) t≥0 has the form S(t) = T0 (t) + K(t), where K(t) is compact for all t ≥ 0. Combining these facts and using (4.6) we finally obtain T (t) = (I + Φλ ) · T0 (t) + K(t) · (I − ελ ⊗ β). Because Φλ and ελ ⊗ β are both compact, this implies the compactness of T (t) − T0 (t) for all t ≥ 0. Summarizing the above results we obtain the following where, in particular, we make the assumptions (4.1) and (4.8). 4.4 Theorem. The operator A generates a positive quasi-compact semigroup T (t) t≥0 on L1 (R+ ). This semigroup is irreducible if and only if there exists no a0 ≥ 0 such that β|[a0 ,∞) = 0 almost everywhere. Proof. We already showed above that T (t) t≥0 is positive. The essential spectral radius is invariant under compact perturbations (see Paragraph V.1.19), hence its quasi-compactness follows from Propositions 4.1 and 4.3 because ress T (1) = ress T0 (1) + [T (1) − T0 (1)] = ress T0 (1) ≤ r T0 (1) = e−µ∞ < 1.

(4.9)

220


In order to prove the claim concerning irreducibility we first observe that it is a simple exercise in linear ODEs to show that for λ > β ∞ the resolvent of A0 is given by (4.10)

& % R(λ, A0 )f (a) =

a

e

−

a s

(λ+µ(r)) dr

f (s) ds,

f ∈ X, a ≥ 0.

0

Now assume that (4.9) does not hold, i.e., that there exists a0 such that β|[a0 ,∞) = 0. Then for each f > 0 such that f |[0,a0 ] = 0 we obtain from (4.10) that [R(λ, A0 )f ](a) = 0 for all a ∈ [0, a0 ]. This implies R(λ, A)f = (I + Φλ )R(λ, A0 )f ! 1 = R(λ, A0 )f + · R(λ, A0 )f, β · ελ 1 − ελ , β = R(λ, A0 )f. Hence, R(λ, A)fis not strictly positive in general for 0 < f and λ > β ∞ and hence T (t) t≥0 not irreducible. Conversely, assume that (4.9) holds and take % & some λ > β ∞ and 0 < f . Then by (4.10) we conclude that ! R(λ, A0 )f (a) > 0 for a ≥ 0 sufficiently large and therefore R(λ, A0 )f, β > 0. Now we obtain as above ! 1 · R(λ, A0 )f, β · ελ 1 − ελ , β ! · R(λ, A0 )f, β · ελ .

R(λ, A)f = R(λ, A0 )f + ≥

1 1 − ελ , β

Because ελ , β < 1 and ελis strictly positive this implies that R(λ, A)f is strictly positive; i.e., T (t) t≥0 is irreducible. After these preparations we are inthe position to analyze the stabil ity and convergence of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 solving the age-dependent population equation (APE). 4.5 Corollary. The following assertions are equivalent. (a) T (t) t≥0 is uniformly exponentially stable. (b) s(A) < 0. (c) ε0 , β =

∞ 0

β(a) · e

−

a 0

µ(s) ds

da < 1.

Proof. Because by Theorem 4.4 we know that T (t) t≥0 is positive and quasi-compact, the equivalence of (a) and (b) follows from Corollary V.4.7 or Theorem 2.5.


221

To prove the remaining implications we observe that by the same arguments as in the proof of Lemma 4.2 it follows that (4.11)

λ − A = (λ − A0 )(I − ελ ⊗ β)

Next we define the function r(λ) := ελ , β =

∞

β(a) · e

−

a 0

for all λ ∈ R.

(λ+µ(s)) ds

da,

λ ∈ R,

0

which is continuous and strictly decreasing. Moreover, (4.12)

lim r(λ) = ∞,

λ→−∞

lim r(λ) = 0

λ→∞

and σ(ελ ⊗ β) = {r(λ)}. Now assume (b). Because s(A0 ) = −µ∞ < 0, the assumption s(A) < 0 together with (4.11) implies that I − ελ ⊗ β is invertible for all λ ≥ 0; i.e., r(λ) = 1 for all λ ≥ 0. By the continuity and monotonicity of r(·) and (4.12) this is possible only if r(0) = ε0 , β < 1. This proves (b) ⇒ (c). Conversely, if ε0 , β < 1, then (I − ε0 ⊗ β)−1 = Φ0 exists and (4.11) implies that −A−1 = −(I + Φ0 )A−1 0 . exists and is negative Here, because s(A0 ) = −µ∞ < 0, the inverse A−1 0 by Lemma 2.1. Now Φ0 ≥ 0 shows R(0, A) = −A−1 ≥ 0 and again by Lemma 2.1 we conclude that s(A) < 0. This proves (c) ⇒ (b) and completes the proof. Our final result deals with convergence to a one-dimensional projection in case s(A) = 0. 4.6 Corollary. Assume that (4.9) holds and ∞ a − µ(s) ds ε0 , β = β(a) · e 0 da = 1. 0

Then there exists a strictly positive linear form ϕ ∈ fix T (t) t≥0 and constants M ≥ 1, ε > 0 such that T (t)f − f, ϕ · ε0 ≤ M e−εt f for all t ≥ 0 f ∈ X. Proof. First we observe that by Theorem 4.4 the condition (4.9) implies that T (t) t≥0 is irreducible. Moreover, the assumption ε0 , β = r(0) = 1 implies by the same reasoning as in the proof of Corollary 4.5 that s(A) = 0. The assertion then follows immediately from Theorem 3.5. 4.7 Remark. The conditions imposed above can be relaxed without changing the conclusions. In particular, one can eliminate the assumptions (4.1), (4.8), and (4.9), still getting stability and convergence of the semigroup T (t) t≥0 as in Corollaries 4.5 and 4.6, respectively. Moreover, these results can be generalized to higher dimensions. For further details see [Gre84] and [Web85].

Appendix A Reminder of Some Functional Analysis and Operator Theory

This book is written in a functional-analytic spirit. Its main objects are operators on Banach spaces, and we use many, sometimes quite sophisticated, results and techniques from functional analysis and operator theory. As a rule, we refer to textbooks such as [Con85], [DS58], [Lan93], [RS72], [Rud73], [TL80], or [Yos65]. However, for the convenience of the reader we add this appendix, where we • Introduce our notation, • List some basic results, and • Prove a few of them. To start with, we introduce the following classical sequence and function spaces. Here, J is a real interval and Ω, depending on the context, is a domain in Rn , a locally compact metric space, or a measure space.

∞ := (xn )n∈N ⊂ C : sup xn < ∞ , (xn )n∈N := sup xn , n∈N n∈N

c := (xn )n∈N ⊂ C : lim xn exists ⊂ ∞ , n→∞

c0 := (xn )n∈N ⊂ C : lim xn = 0 ⊂ c, n→∞ 1/p

|xn |p < ∞ , p ≥ 1, (xn )n∈N := |xn |p ,

p := (xn )n∈N ⊂ C : n∈N

n∈N

222

Appendix. A Reminder of Some Functional Analysis and Operator Theory

223

C(Ω) := {f : Ω → K | f is continuous}, f ∞ := sup |f (s)| (if Ω is compact), s∈Ω

C0 (Ω) := {f ∈ C(Ω) : f vanishes at infinity}; cf. p. 20, Cb (Ω) := {f ∈ C(Ω) : f is bounded}, Cc (Ω) := {f ∈ C(Ω) : f has compact support}; cf. p. 21, Cub (Ω) := {f ∈ C(Ω) : f is bounded and uniformly continuous}, AC(J) := {f : J → K | f is absolutely continuous}, Ck (J) := {f ∈ C(J) : f is k-times continuously differentiable}, C∞ (J) := {f ∈ C(J) : f is infinitely many times differentiable}, Lp (Ω, µ) := f : Ω → K | f is p-integrable on Ω , 1/p f p := |f |p (s) dµ(s) , Ω L∞ (Ω, µ) := f : Ω → K | f is measurable and µ-essentially bounded , f ∞ := ess sup |f |; cf. p. 28, f is k-times distributionally differentiable Wk,p (Ω) := f ∈ Lp (Ω) : , α p with D f ∈ L (Ω) for all |α| ≤ k Hk (Ω) := Wk,2 (Ω), Hk0 (J) := {f ∈ Hk (J) : f (s) = 0 for s ∈ ∂J}, S (Rn ) := Schwartz space of rapidly decreasing functions;

cf. p. 55.

Clearly, we may combine the various sub- and superscripts for the spaces of continuous functions and obtain, e.g., C1c (J) = C1 (J) ∩ Cc (J). For an abstract complex Banach space X we denote its dual by X and the canonical bilinear form by x, x

for x ∈ X,

x ∈ X .

As usual, we also write x (x) for x, x and denote by σ(X, X ) the weak topology on X and by σ(X , X) the weak∗ topology on X . Then the following properties hold. A.1 Proposition. (i) For convex sets in X (in particular, for subspaces) the weak and norm closure coincide. (ii) The closed, convex hull co K of a weakly compact set K in X is weakly compact (Kreˇın’s theorem). (iii) The dual unit ball U 0 := {x ∈ X : x ≤ 1} is weak∗ compact (Banach–Alaoglu’s theorem).

224


The space of all bounded, linear operators on X is denoted1 by L(X) and becomes a Banach space for the norm T := sup{ T x : x ≤ 1},

T ∈ L(X).

The operators T ∈ L(X) satisfying T x ≤ x

for all x ∈ X

are called contractions, whereas isometries are defined by T x = x

for all x ∈ X.

Besides the uniform operator topology on L(X), which is the one induced by the above operator norm, we frequently consider two more topologies on L(X). We write Ls (X) if we endow L(X) with the strong operator topology, which is the topology of pointwise convergence on (X, · ). Finally, Lσ (X) denotes L(X) with the weak operator topology, which is the topology of pointwise convergence on X, σ(X, X ) . A net (Tα )α∈A ⊂ L(X) converges to T ∈ L(X) if and only if (A.1) (A.2) (A.3)

Tα − T → 0 (uniform operator topology), Tα x − T x → 0 ∀ x ∈ X (strong operator topology), | Tα x − T x, x | → 0 ∀ x ∈ X, x ∈ X (weak operator topology).

With these notions, the principle of uniform boundedness can be stated as follows. A.2 Proposition. For a subset K ⊂ L(X) the following properties are equivalent. (a) K is bounded for the weak operator topology. (b) K is bounded for the strong operator topology. (c) K is uniformly bounded; i.e., T ≤ c for all T ∈ K. Continuity with respect to the strong operator topology is shown frequently by using the following property (b) (see [Sch80, Sect. III.4.5]). A.3 Proposition. On bounded subsets of L(X), the following topologies coincide. (a) The strong operator topology. (b) The topology of pointwise convergence on a dense subset of X. (c) The topology of uniform convergence on relatively compact subsets of X. 1 For the space of all bounded, linear operators between two normed spaces X and Y we use the notation L(X, Y ).


225

The advantage of using the strong or weak operator topology instead of the norm topology on L(X) is that the former yield more continuity and more compactness. This becomes evident already from the definition of a strongly continuous semigroup in Section I.1. As an example for the functional-analytic constructions made throughout the text, we consider the following setting. Let Xt0 := C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) be the space of all functions on [0, t0 ] into L(X) that are continuous for the strong operator topology. For each F ∈ Xt0 and x ∈ X, the functions t → F (t)x are continuous, hence bounded, on [0, t0 ]. The uniform boundedness principle then implies F ∞ := sup F (s) < ∞. s∈[0,t0 ]

Clearly, this defines a norm making Xt0 a complete space. A.4 Proposition. The space Xt0 := C [0, t0 ], Ls (X) , · ∞ is a Banach space. sequence in Xt0 . Then, by the definition Proof. Let (Fn )n∈Nbe a Cauchy of the norm in Xt0 , Fn (·)x n∈N is a Cauchy sequence in C([0, t0 ], X) for all x ∈ X. Because C([0, t0 ], X) is complete, the limit limn→∞ Fn (·)x =: F (·)x ∈ C([0, t0 ], X) exists, and we obtain limn→∞ Fn = F in Xt0 . Familiarity with linear operators, in particular unbounded operators, is essential for an understanding of our semigroups and their generators. The best introduction is still Kato’s monograph [Kat80] (see also [DS58], [GGK90], [Gol66], [TL80], [Wei80]), but we briefly restate some of the basic definitions and properties.2 A.5 Definition. A linear operator A with domain D(A) in a Banach space X, i.e., D(A) ⊂ X → X, is closed if it satisfies one of the following equivalent properties. (a) If for the sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) the limits limn→∞ xn = x ∈ X and limn→∞ Axn = y ∈ X exist, then x ∈ D(A) and Ax = y. (b) The graph G(A) := {(x, Ax) : x ∈ D(A)} is closed in X × X. (c) X1 := D(A), · A is a Banach space 3 for the graph norm x A := x + Ax ,

x ∈ D(A).

2 Most of the following concepts also make sense for operators acting between different Banach spaces. However, for simplicity we state them for a single Banach space only and leave the straightforward generalization to the reader. 3 This definition of X also makes sense if A has an empty resolvent set. Because 1 if ρ(A) = ∅, the graph norm and the norms · 1,λ from Exercise II.2.22.(1) are all equivalent, this definition of X1 will not conflict with Definition II.2.14 for n = 1.

226


(d) A is weakly closed ; i.e., property (a) (or property (b)) holds for the σ(X, X )-topology on X. If λ − A is injective for some λ ∈ C, then the above properties are also equivalent to (e) (λ − A)−1 is closed. Next we consider perturbations of closed operators. Whereas the additive perturbation of a closed operator A by a bounded operator B ∈ L(X) yields again a closed operator, the situation is slightly more complicated for multiplicative perturbations. A.6 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be a closed operator and take B ∈ L(X). Then the following hold. (i) AB with domain D(AB) := {x ∈ X : Bx ∈ D(A)} is closed. (ii) BA with domain D(BA) := D(A) is closed if B −1 ∈ L(X). Proof. (i) is easy to check and implies (ii) after the similarity transfor mation BA = B(AB)B −1 . It will be important to find closed extensions of not necessarily closed operators. Here are the relevant notions. A.7 Definition. An operator B, D(B) is an extension of A, D(A) , in symbols A ⊂ B, if D(A) ⊂ D(B) and Bx = Ax for x ∈ D(A). The smallest closed extension of A, if it exists, is called the closure of A and is denoted by A. Operators having a closure are called closable. A.8 Proposition. An operator A, D(A) is closable if and only if for every sequence (xn )n∈N ⊂ D(A) with xn → 0 and Axn → z one has z = 0. In that case, the graph of the closure is given by G(A) = G(A). A simple operator that is not closable is Af := f (0) · 1 with domain D(A) := C1 [0, 1] in the Banach space X := C[0, 1]. This follows, e.g., from the following characterization of bounded linear forms and the fact that the kernel of a closed operator is always closed.4 A.9 Proposition. Let X be a normed vector space and take a linear functional x : X → C. Then x is bounded if and only if its kernel ker x is closed in X. Hence, x is unbounded if and only if ker x is dense in X. 4 Here, for a linear map Φ : X → Y between two vector spaces X and Y its kernel is defined by ker Φ := {x ∈ X : Φx = 0}.


227

Proof. If x is bounded, then clearly ker(x ) is closed. On the other hand, if ker x is closed, then the quotient X/ker x is a normed vector space of dimension 1. Moreover, we can decompose x = i x$ by the canonical maps i : X/ker x → C and x$ : X → X/ker x . Because x$ ≤ 1, this proves that x is bounded. The remaining assertions follow from the fact that for each linear form x = 0 the codimension of ker x in X is 1. A subspace D of D(A) that is dense in D(A) for the graph norm is called a core for A. If A, D(A) is closed, one can recover A from its restriction to a core D; i.e., the closure of (A, D) becomes A, D(A) . See Exercise II.1.15.(2). The closed graph theorem states that everywhere defined closed operators are already bounded. It can be phrased as follows. A.10 Theorem. For a closed operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X the following properties are equivalent. (a) A, D(A) is a bounded operator; i.e., there exists c ≥ 0 such that Ax ≤ c x

for all x ∈ D(A).

(b) D(A) is a closed subspace of X. By the closed graph theorem, one obtains the following surprising result. A.11 Corollary. Let A : D(A) ⊂ X → X be closed and assume that a Banach spaceY is continuously embedded in X such that the range rg A := A D(A) is contained in Y . Then A is bounded from (D(A), · A ) into Y . If an operator A has dense domain D(A) in X, we can define its adjoint operator on the dual space X .5 A.12 Definition. For a densely defined operator A, D(A) on X, we define the adjoint operator A , D(A ) on X by D(A ) : = x ∈ X : ∃ y ∈ X such that Ax, x = x, y ∀ x ∈ D(A) , A x : = y for x ∈ D(A ). A.13 Example. Take Ap := d/ds on Xp := Lp (R), 1 ≤ p < ∞, with domain D(Ap ) := W1,p (R) := {f ∈ Xp : f absolutely continuous, f ∈ Xp }. Then Ap = −Aq on Xq , where 1/p + 1/q = 1. For a proof and many more examples we refer to [Gol66, Sect. II.2 and Chap. VI] and [Kat80, Sect. III.5]. Compare also Exercise II.4.14.(11). Although the adjoint operator is always closed, it may happen that D(A ) = {0} (e.g., take the nonclosable operator following Proposition A.8). 5 Similarly, one can define the Hilbert space adjoint A∗ by replacing the canonical bilinear form · , · by the inner product ( · | · ).

228


On reflexive Banach spaces there is a nice duality between densely defined and closable operators. A.14 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be a densely defined operator on a reflexive Banach space X. Then the adjoint A is densely defined if and only if A is closable. In that case, one has (A ) = A. We now prove a close relationship between inverses and adjoints. A.15 Proposition. Let A, D(A) be a densely defined closed operator on X. Then the inverse A−1 ∈ L(X) exists if and only if the inverse (A )−1 ∈ L(X ) exists. In that case, one has (A )−1 = (A−1 ) . Proof. Assume A−1 ∈ L(X). Because (A−1 ) ∈ L(X ), one has ! ! ! x, (A−1 ) A x = A−1 x, A x = AA−1 x, x = x, x for all x ∈ X, x ∈ D(A ); i.e., A has a left inverse. Similarly, ! ! Ax, (A−1 ) x = A−1 Ax, x = x, x holds for all x ∈ D(A), x ∈ X ; i.e., (A−1 ) x ∈ D(A ) and A (A−1 ) x = x . On the other hand, assume (A )−1 ∈ L(X ). Then ! ! Ax, (A )−1 x = x, A (A )−1 x = x, x for all x ∈ D(A) and x ∈ X . For every x ∈ D(A), choose x ∈ X such that x = 1 and | x, x | = x and obtain ! x = Ax, (A )−1 x ≤ Ax · (A )−1 . This shows that A is injective and its inverse satisfies −1 −1 A ≤ (A ) , hence is bounded. By Theorem A.10, D(A−1 ) = rg A must be closed. A simple Hahn–Banach argument shows that rg A = X, hence A−1 ∈ L(X). A.16 Corollary. For a densely defined closed operator A, D(A) the spectra of A and of A coincide; i.e., σ(A) = σ(A ) and R(λ, A) = R(λ, A ) for all λ ∈ ρ(A).


229

Now we turn again to the unbounded situation and define iterates of unbounded operators. A.17 Definition. The nth power An of an operator A : D(A) ⊂ X → X is defined successively as An x : = A(An−1 x), D(An ) : = x ∈ D(A) : An−1 x ∈ D(A) . In general, it may happen that D(A2 ) = {0} even if A is densely defined and closed. However, if A−1 ∈ L(X) exists (or if ρ(A) = ∅), the infinite intersection ∞ D(A∞ ) := D(An ) n=1

is still dense. This is proved in Proposition II.1.8 for semigroup generators and in [Len94] or [AEMK94, Prop. 6.2] for the general case. Next, we give some results concerning the continuity and differentiability of products of operator-valued functions. A.18 Lemma. Let J be some real interval and P , Q : I → L(X) be two strongly continuous operator-valued functions defined on J. Then the product (P Q)(·) : J → L(X), defined by (P Q)(t) := P (t)Q(t), is strongly continuous as well. Proof. We fix x ∈ X and t ∈ J and take a sequence (tn )n∈N ⊂ J with limn→∞ tn = t. Then, by the uniform boundedness principle, the set {P (tn ) : n ∈ N} ⊂ L(X) is bounded, and therefore P (tn )Q(tn )x − P (t)Q(t)x ≤ P (tn ) · Q(tn )x − Q(t)x + P (tn ) − P (t) Q(t)x , where the right-hand side converges to zero as n → ∞.

A.19 Lemma. Let J be some real interval and P , Q : J → L(X) be two strongly continuous operator-valued functions defined on J. Moreover, assume that P (·)x : J → X and Q(·)x : J → X are differentiable for all x ∈ D for some subspace D of X, which is invariant under Q. Then (P Q)(·)x : J → X, defined by (P Q)(t)x := P (t)Q(t)x, is differentiable for every x ∈ D and d d d dt P (·)Q(·)x (t0 ) = dt P (·)Q(t0 )x (t0 ) + P (t0 ) dt Q(·)x (t0 ). Proof. Let t0 ∈ J and (hn )n∈N ⊂ R be a sequence such that limn→∞ hn = 0 and t0 + hn ∈ J for all n ∈ N. Then, for x ∈ D, we have P (t0 + hn )Q(t0 + hn )x − P (t0 )Q(t0 )x hn Q(t0 + hn )x − Q(t0 )x P (t0 + hn ) − P (t0 ) = P (t0 + hn ) + Q(t0 )x hn hn =: L1 (n, x) + L2 (n, x).

230


Clearly, the sequence L2 (n, x) n∈N converges for all x ∈ D and its limit is limn→∞ L2 (n, x) = P (t0 )Q(t0 )x. In order to show that L1 (n, x) n∈N converges for x ∈ D, note that

Q(t0 + hn )x − Q(t0 )x :n∈N hn

is relatively compact in X and that {P (t0 + hn ) : n ∈ N} is bounded. Because by Proposition A.3 the topologies of pointwise convergence and of uniform convergence on relatively compact sets coincide, we conclude that L1 (n, x) n∈N converges for x ∈ D and lim L1 (n, x) = P (t0 )Q (t0 )x.

n→∞

This completes the proof.

In the context of operators on spaces of vector-valued functions it is convenient to use the following tensor product notation. Assume that X, Y are Banach spaces, F(J, Y ) is a Banach space of Y valued functions defined on an interval J ⊆ R, T ∈ L(X, Y ) is a bounded linear operator, and f : J → C is a complex-valued function. If the map f ⊗ y : J s → f (s) · y ∈ Y belongs to F(J, Y ) for all y ∈ Y , then we define the linear operator f ⊗ T : X → F(J, Y ) by

(f ⊗ T )x (s) := (f ⊗ T x)(s) = f (s) · T x

for all x ∈ X, s ∈ J. Independently, for a Banach space X and elements x ∈ X, x ∈ X , we frequently use the tensor product notation x ⊗ x for the rank-one operator on X defined by (x ⊗ x ) v := x (v) · x,

v ∈ X.

We conclude this appendix with the following vector-valued version of the Riemann–Lebesgue lemma. A.20 Theorem. If f ∈ L1 (R, X), then f$ ∈ C0 (R, X); i.e., we have lims→±∞ f$(s) = 0. For the proof it suffices to consider step functions, for which, as in the scalar case, the assertion follows by integration by parts.

References

[AB85]

C.D. Aliprantis and O. Burkinshaw, Positive Operators, Academic Press, 1985. [AB88] W. Arendt and C.J.K. Batty, Tauberian theorems for oneparameter semigroups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 306 (1988), 837–852. [ABHN01] W. Arendt, C.J.K. Batty, M. Hieber, and F. Neubrander, Vector-valued Laplace Transforms and Cauchy Problems, Monographs Math., vol. 96, Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 2001. [AEMK94] W. Arendt, O. El-Mennaoui, and V. Keyantuo, Local integrated semigroups: Evolution with jumps of regularity, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 186 (1994), 572–595. [Alb01] J. Alber, On implemented semigroups, Semigroup Forum 63 (2001), 371–386. [Ama90] H. Amann, Ordinary Differential Equations. An Introduction to Nonlinear Analysis, de Gruyter Stud. Math., vol. 13, de Gruyter, 1990. [Are87] W. Arendt, Resolvent positive operators, Proc. London Math. Soc. 54 (1987), 321–349. [Bea82] B. Beauzamy, Introduction to Banach Spaces and Their Geometry, North-Holland Math. Stud., vol. 68, North-Holland, 1982. [Bla01] M.D. Blake, A spectral bound for asymptotically normcontinuous semigroups, J. Operator Theory 45 (2001), 111– 130. 231

232

[BLX05]

References

C.J.K. Batty, J. Liang, and T.-J. Xiao, On the spectral and growth bound of semigroups associated with hyperbolic equations, Adv. Math. 191 (2005), 1–10. [BP79] A. Berman and R.J. Plemmons, Nonnegative Matrices in the Mathematical Sciences, Academic Press, 1979. [BP05] A. B` atkai and S. Piazzera, Semigroups for Delay Equations, AK Peters, 2005. [CL03] D. Cramer and Y. Latushkin, Gearhart–Pr¨ uss Theorem in stability for wave equations: a survey, Evolution Equations (G. Ruiz Goldstein, R. Nagel, and S. Romanelli, eds.), Lect. Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 234, Marcel Dekker, 2003, pp. 105–119. [Con85] J.B. Conway, A Course in Functional Analysis, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 96, Springer-Verlag, 1985. [CPY74] S.R. Caradus, W.E. Pfaffenberger, and B. Yood, Calkin Algebras and Algebras of Operators on Banach Spaces, Lect. Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 9, Marcel Dekker, 1974. [CT06] R. Chill and Y. Tomilov, Stability of operator semigroups: ideas and results, Banach Center Publ. (2006), (to appear). [deL94] R. deLaubenfels, Existence Families, Functional Calculi and Evolution Equations, Lect. Notes in Math., vol. 1570, SpringerVerlag, 1994. [DS58] N. Dunford and J.T. Schwartz, Linear Operators I. General Theory, Interscience Publishers, 1958. [DS88] W. Desch and W. Schappacher, Some perturbation results for analytic semigroups, Math. Ann. 281 (1988), 157–162. [Dug66] J. Dugundji, Topology, Allyn and Bacon, 1966. [Dys49] F.J. Dyson, The radiation theories of Tomonaga, Schwinger, and Feynman, Phys. Rev. 75 (1949), 486–502. [EFNS05] T. Eisner, B. Farkas, R. Nagel, and A. Serény, Almost weak stability of C0 -semigroups, T¨ ubinger Berichte zur Funktionalanalysis 14 (2005), 66–76. [EN00] K.-J. Engel and R. Nagel, One-Parameter Semigroups for Linear Evolution Equations, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 194, Springer-Verlag, 2000. [Gea78] L. Gearhart, Spectral theory for contraction semigroups on Hilbert spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 236 (1978), 385–394. [Gel39] I.M. Gelfand, On one-parameter groups of operators in a normed space, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 25 (1939), 713–718. [GGK90] I. Gohberg, S. Goldberg, and M.A. Kaashoek, Classes of Linear Operators I, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., vol. 49, Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 1990.

References

233

[Gol66]

S. Goldberg, Unbounded Linear Operators, McGraw-Hill, 1966.

[Gol85]

J.A. Goldstein, Semigroups of Operators and Applications, Oxford University Press, 1985.

[Gre84]

G. Greiner, A typical Perron–Frobenius theorem with applications to an age-dependent population equation, InfiniteDimensional Systems (F. Kappel and W. Schappacher, eds.), Lect. Notes in Math., vol. 1076, Springer-Verlag, 1984, pp. 86– 100.

[Gre85]

G. Greiner, Some applications of Fejers theorem to oneparameter semigroups, Semesterbericht Funktionalanalysis T¨ ubingen 7 (Wintersemester 1984/85), 33–50, see also [Nag86, Sect. A-III.7].

[GS91]

G. Greiner and M. Schwarz, Weak spectral mapping theorems for functional differential equations, J. Differential Equations 94 (1991), 205–216.

[Haa06]

M. Haase, The Functional Calculus for Sectorial Operators, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 2006, (to appear).

[Hal63]

P.R. Halmos, What does the spectral theorem say?, Amer. Math. Monthly 70 (1963), 241–247.

[Hal74]

P.R. Halmos, Measure Theory, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 18, Springer-Verlag, 1974.

[Hes70]

P. Hess, Zur St¨ orungstheorie linearer Operatoren in Banachr¨ aumen, Comment. Math. Helv. 45 (1970), 229–235.

[HHK06]

B. Haak, M. Haase, and P. Kunstmann, Perturbation, interpolation, and maximal regularity, Adv. Diff. Equations 11 (2006), 201–240.

[Hil48]

E. Hille, Functional Analysis and Semigroups, Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ., vol. 31, Amer. Math. Soc., 1948.

[HP57]

E. Hille and R.S. Phillips, Functional Analysis and Semigroups, Amer. Math. Soc. Coll. Publ., vol. 31, Amer. Math. Soc., 1957.

[HW03]

M. Hieber and I. Wood, Asymptotics of perturbations to the wave equation, Evolution Equations (G. Ruiz Goldstein, R. Nagel, and S. Romanelli, eds.), Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math., vol. 234, Marcel Dekker, 2003, pp. 243–252.

[Kat59]

T. Kato, Remarks on pseudo-resolvents and infinitesimal generators of semigroups, Proc. Japan Acad. 35 (1959), 467–468.

[Kat80]

T. Kato, Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, 2nd ed., Grundlehren Math. Wiss., vol. 132, Springer-Verlag, 1980.

[Kel75]

J.L. Kelley, General Topology, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 27, Springer-Verlag, 1975.

[Kre85]

U. Krengel, Ergodic Theorems, de Gruyter, 1985.

234

References

[KS05]

M. Kramar and E. Sikolya, Spectral properties and asymptotic periodicity of flows in networks, Math. Z. 249 (2005), 139–162.

[Lan93]

S. Lang, Real and Functional Analysis, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 142, Springer-Verlag, 1993.

[Len94]

C. Lennard, A Baire category theorem for the domains of iterates of a linear operator, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 24 (1994), 615–627.

[Lia92]

A.M. Liapunov, Stability of Motion, Ph.D. thesis, Kharkov, 1892, English translation, Academic Press, 1966.

[Lot85]

H.P. Lotz, Uniform convergence of operators on L∞ and similar spaces, Math. Z. 190 (1985), 207–220.

[LP61]

G. Lumer and R.S. Phillips, Dissipative operators in a Banach space, Pacific J. Math. 11 (1961), 679–698.

[Lun95]

A. Lunardi, Analytic Semigroups and Optimal Regularity in Parabolic Problems, Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 1995.

[LV88]

Yu.I. Lyubich and Quˆ oc Ph´ ong V˜ u, Asymptotic stability of linear differential equations on Banach spaces, Studia Math. 88 (1988), 37–42.

[LZ99]

Z. Liu and S. Zheng, Semigroups Associated with Dissipative Systems, Res. Notes Math., vol. 398, Chapman & Hall/CRC, 1999.

[MM96]

J. Martinez and J.M. Maz´ on, C0 -semigroups norm continuous at infinity, Semigroup Forum 52 (1996), 213–224.

[MN91]

P. Meyer-Nieberg, Banach Lattices, Springer-Verlag, 1991.

[Nag86]

R. Nagel (ed.), One-Parameter Semigroups of Positive Operators, Lect. Notes in Math., vol. 1184, Springer-Verlag, 1986.

[Nee96]

J.M.A.A. van Neerven, The Asymptotic Behaviour of Semigroups of Linear Operators, Oper. Theory Adv. Appl., vol. 88, Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 1996.

[Neu88]

F. Neubrander, Integrated semigroups and their application to the abstract Cauchy problem, Pacific J. Math. 135 (1988), 111– 157.

[NP94]

J.M.A.A. van Neerven and Ben de Pagter, The adjoint of a positive semigroup, Compositio Math. 90 (1994), 99–118.

[NP00]

R. Nagel and J. Poland, The critical spectrum of a strongly continuous semigroup, Adv. Math. 152 (2000), 120–133.

[Ped89]

G.K. Pedersen, Analysis Now, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 118, Springer-Verlag, 1989.

[Phi53]

R.S. Phillips, Perturbation theory for semi-groups of linear operators, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 74 (1953), 199–221.

References

[Pr¨ u84] [Rao87] [Ren94] [RR93]

[RS72]

[RS75]

[Rud73] [Rud86] [Sch74] [Sch80] [SD80] [Sin05] [Sto32] [Tay85] [TL80] [Tro58] [Ulm92] [Web85] [Web87]

235

J. Pr¨ uss, On the spectrum of C0 -semigroups, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 284 (1984), 847–857. M.M. Rao, Measure Theory and Integration, John Wiley & Sons, 1987. M. Renardy, On the linear stability of hyperbolic PDEs and viscoelastic flows, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 45 (1994), 854–865. M. Renardy and R.C. Rogers, An Introduction to Partial Differential Equations, Texts in Appl. Math., vol. 13, SpringerVerlag, 1993. M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics I. Functional Analysis, Academic Press, New York, 1972. M. Reed and B. Simon, Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics II. Fourier Analysis and Self-Adjointness, Academic Press, New York, 1975. W. Rudin, Functional Analysis, McGraw-Hill, 1973. W. Rudin, Real and Complex Analysis, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, 1986. H.H. Schaefer, Banach Lattices and Positive Operators, Grundlehren Math. Wiss., vol. 215, Springer-Verlag, 1974. H.H. Schaefer, Topological Vector Spaces, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 3, Springer-Verlag, 1980. W. Schempp and B. Dreseler, Einf¨ uhrung in die Harmonische Analyse, Teubner Verlag, 1980. E. Sinestrari, Product semigroups and extrapolation spaces, Semigroup Forum 71 (2005), 102–118. M.H. Stone, On one-parameter unitary groups in Hilbert space, Ann. of Math. 33 (1932), 643–648. A.E. Taylor, General Theory of Functions and Integration, Dover Publications, 1985. A.E. Taylor and D.C. Lay, Introduction to Functional Analysis, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, 1980. H. Trotter, Approximation of semigroups of operators, Pacific J. Math. 8 (1958), 887–919. M.G. Ulmet, Properties of semigroups generated by first order differential operators, Results Math. 22 (1992), 821–832. G.F. Webb, Theory of Non-Linear Age-Dependent Population Dynamics, Marcel Dekker, 1985. G.F. Webb, An operator-theoretic formulation of asynchronous exponential growth, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 303 (1987), 751– 763.

236

References

[Wei80]

J. Weidmann, Linear Operators in Hilbert Space, Graduate Texts in Math., vol. 68, Springer-Verlag, 1980.

[Wei95]

L. Weis, The stability of positive semigroups on Lp -spaces, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), 3089–3094.

[Wei98]

L. Weis, A short proof for the stability theorem for positive semigroups on Lp (µ), Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 126 (1998), 3253–3256.

[Wol81]

M. Wolff, A remark on the spectral bound of the generator of semigroups of positive operators with applications to stability theory, Functional Analysis and Approximation (P.L. Butzer, B. Sz.-Nagy, and E. G¨ orlich, eds.), Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 1981, pp. 39–50.

[Yos48]

K. Yosida, On the differentiability and the representation of one-parameter semigroups of linear operators, J. Math. Soc. Japan 1 (1948), 15–21.

[Yos65]

K. Yosida, Functional Analysis, Grundlehren Math. Wiss., vol. 123, Springer-Verlag, 1965.

Selected References to Recent Research

Semigroups for Functional Partial Differential Equations [BP05] [BS04]

A. B` atkai and S. Piazzera, Semigroups for Delay Equations, AK Peters, 2005. A. B´ atkai and R. Schnaubelt, Asymptotic behaviour of parabolic problems with delays in the highest order derivatives, Semigroup Forum 69 (2004), 369–399.

Semigroups for Stochastic Partial Differential Equations [DP04]

[DP04b]

[Jac05] [MR04]

[Tai03]

G. Da Prato, An introduction to Markov semigroups, Functional Analytic Methods for Evolution Equations (M. Iannelli, R. Nagel, and S. Piazzera, eds.), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1855, Springer, 2004, pp. 1–63. G. Da Prato, Kolmogorov Equations for Stochastic PDEs, Advanced Courses in Mathematics. CRM Barcelona, Birkh¨ auser Verlag, 2004. N. Jacob, Pseudo Differential Operators and Markov Processes. Vol. I–III, Imperial College Press, 2001–2005. S. Magnilia, A. Rhandi, Gaussian Measures on Separable Hilbert Spaces and Applications, Quaderno dell’ Universit` a di Lecce, 1/2004. K. Taira, Semigroups, Boundary Value Problems and Markov Processes, Springer-Verlag, 2003. 237

238


Semigroups for Dynamical Boundary Conditions [CENN03] V. Casarino, K.-J. Engel, R. Nagel, and G. Nickel, A semigroup approach to boundary feedback systems, Integral Equations Operator Theory 47 (2003), 289–306. [FGGR02] A. Favini, G. Ruiz Goldstein, J. Goldstein, S. Romanelli, The heat equation with generalized Wentzell boundary condition, J. Evol. Equ. 2 (2002) 1–19. [Nic04]

G. Nickel, A semigroup approach to dynamic boundary value problems, Semigroup Forum 69 (2004), 159–183.

Semigroups for Maximal Regularity [KW04]

P.C. Kunstmann and L. Weis, Maximal Lp -regularity for parabolic equations, Fourier multiplier theorems and H∞ functional calculus, Functional Analytic Methods for Evolution Equations (M. Iannelli, R. Nagel, and S. Piazzera, eds.), Lect. Notes in Math., vol. 1855, Springer, 2004, pp. 65–311.

Semigroups for Dynamical Networks [KMS06]

M. Kramar Fijavˇz, D. Mugnolo, and E. Sikolya, Variational and semigroups methods for waves and diffusion in networks, Appl. Math. Optim. (2006).

[KS05]

M. Kramar and E. Sikolya, Spectral properties and asymptotic periodicity of flows in networks, Math. Z. 249 (2005), 139–162.

[MS06]

T. M´ atrai and E. Sikolya, Asymptotic behavior of flows in networks, Forum Math. (2006) (to appear).

[Sik05]

E. Sikolya, Flows in networks with dynamic ramification nodes, J. Evol. Equ. 5 (2005), 441–463.

Semigroups for Numerical Analysis [HV03]

W. Hundsdorfer, J. Verwer, Numerical Solution of TimeDependent Advection-Diffusion-Reaction Equations, Springer Ser. Comput. Math., vol 33, Springer-Verlag, 2003.

[IK02]

K. Ito, F. Kappel, Evolution Equations and Approximations, Ser. Adv. Math. Appl. Sci., vol. 61, World Sci. Publishing, 2002.

[JL00]

T. Jahnke, C. Lubich, Error bounds for exponential operator splittings, BIT 40 (2000), 735–744.


239

Semigroups for Boundary Control [Las04]

I. Lasiecka, Optimal control problems and Riccati equations for systems with unbounded controls and partially analytic generators—applications to boundary and point control problems, Functional Analytic Methods for Evolution Equations (M. Iannelli, R. Nagel, and S. Piazzera, eds.), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1855, Springer, 2004, pp. 313–369.

Semigroups for Diffusion on Manifolds [Ouh04]

E.-M. Ouhabaz, Analysis of Heat Equations on Domains, London Math. Sob. Monogr., vol. 31, Oxford University Press, 2004.

[Pre04]

M. Preunkert, A semigroup version of the isoperimetric inequality, Semigroup Forum 68 (2004), 233–245.

List of Symbols and Abbreviations

(ACP) (CSMT) (DE) (FE) (IE) (IE∗ ) (SBeGB) (SMT) (WSMT) 1 · A · ess · n ·, · (·|·) f ⊗y f ⊗T x ⊗ x 0≤f 0

A Short Course on Operator Semigroups (Universitext)

Short Course on Operator Semigroups

A Short Course on Operator Semigroups